Wadsworth v. Norris Lake Shores Development Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wadsworth v. Norris Lake Shores Development Corp.

204 S.E.2d 482, 130 Ga. App. 732, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1242

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 31, 1974

Docket48719

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 204 S.E.2d 482 (Wadsworth v. Norris Lake Shores Development Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wadsworth v. Norris Lake Shores Development Corp., 204 S.E.2d 482, 130 Ga. App. 732, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1242 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff sued for damages alleging that he had purchased a lot from the defendant and was induced to do so by fraud and deceit. The defendant denied the allegations of fraud. The defendant moved for summary judgment relying only upon the plaintiffs allegations of fraud. No evidence by way of affidavit or otherwise was submitted by defendant to support the motion. An examination of the pleadings, which is the only basis [733]*733for the grant of the motion for summary judgment, reveals that there are genuine issues of material fact present for jury resolution. The question of whether the party complaining of the alleged fraud has used proper diligence to discover the alleged fraud is ordinarily for the jury. Cato v. English, 228 Ga. 120, 122 (184 SE2d 161). The defendant failed to pierce the allegations of fraud contained in plaintiffs complaint and it was error for the trial, judge to grant the summary judgment.

Argued November 5, 1973 Decided January 31, 1974. Herbert T. Jenkins, Jr., Fred W. Minter, for appellant. Webb, Fowler & Tanner, Jones Webb, for appellee.

Judgment reversed.

Deen and Quillian, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bell, Chief Judge.

The plaintiff sued for damages alleging that he had purchased a lot from the defendant and was induced to do so by fraud and deceit. The defendant denied the allegations of fraud. The defendant moved for summary judgment relying only upon the plaintiffs allegations of fraud. No evidence by way of affidavit or otherwise was submitted by defendant to support the motion. An examination of the pleadings, which is the only basis [733]*733for the grant of the motion for summary judgment, reveals that there are genuine issues of material fact present for jury resolution. The question of whether the party complaining of the alleged fraud has used proper diligence to discover the alleged fraud is ordinarily for the jury. Cato v. English, 228 Ga. 120, 122 (184 SE2d 161). The defendant failed to pierce the allegations of fraud contained in plaintiffs complaint and it was error for the trial, judge to grant the summary judgment.

Argued November 5, 1973 Decided January 31, 1974. Herbert T. Jenkins, Jr., Fred W. Minter, for appellant. Webb, Fowler & Tanner, Jones Webb, for appellee.

Judgment reversed.

Deen and Quillian, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 S.E.2d 482, 130 Ga. App. 732, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1242, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wadsworth-v-norris-lake-shores-development-corp-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack