Wallace v. Jones

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wallace v. Jones

114 S.E.2d 436, 101 Ga. App. 563, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 940

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 29, 1960

Docket38233

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 114 S.E.2d 436 (Wallace v. Jones) 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

Wallace v. Jones, 114 S.E.2d 436, 101 Ga. App. 563, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 940 (Ga. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. “The expenses of litigation are not generally allowed as a part of the damages; but if the defendant has acted in bad faith, or has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, the jury may allow them.” Code § 20-1404.

2. “Such a recovery can be had only by virtue of this statute, and then only under certain conditions and circumstances, and the provision is made for a recovery by the plaintiff against the defendant . . . The authority given by the statute is to the plaintiff against the defendant.” Busbee v. Sellers, 71 Ga. App. 26, 28 (29 S. E. 2d 710).

3. “There is no law by which every case brought by a plaintiff can be turned into a damage suit by the defendant against the plaintiff for bringing it, while it is still pending.” Fender v. Ramsey & Phillips, 131 Ga. 440, 443 (62 S. E. 527).

4. Where the plaintiff sued to recover for timber cut and carried away by the defendant as a wilful trespasser, and the defendant by way of amendment to his answer sought to set up a cross-action for attorney’s fees and expenses on the ground that the plaintiff had acted in bad faith by failing to disclose his claim at an earlier time “and in bringing this action” the court did not err in excluding evidence as to the defendant’s alleged expenses and in sustaining the plaintiff’s oral motion to dismiss the allegations and prayers for attorney’s fees and expenses. Fender v. Ramsey & Phillips, 131 Ga. 440 (2), supra; Busbee v. Sellers, 71 Ga. App. 26 (2), supra; Ellis v. Millen Hotel Co., 192 Ga. 66, 70 (14 S. E. 2d 565); Randolph v. Merchants &c. Loan Co., 58 Ga. App. 566, 572 (199 S. E. 549). Under these circumstances it was not harmful for the, court to allow the plaintiff to dismiss his petition “with the right to refile same within a period of six months as provided by law.”

Judgment affirmed.

Nichols and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. “The expenses of litigation are not generally allowed as a part of the damages; but if the defendant has acted in bad faith, or has been stubbornly litigious, or has caused the plaintiff unnecessary trouble and expense, the jury may allow them.” Code § 20-1404.

2. “Such a recovery can be had only by virtue of this statute, and then only under certain conditions and circumstances, and the provision is made for a recovery by the plaintiff against the defendant . . . The authority given by the statute is to the plaintiff against the defendant.” Busbee v. Sellers, 71 Ga. App. 26, 28 (29 S. E. 2d 710).

3. “There is no law by which every case brought by a plaintiff can be turned into a damage suit by the defendant against the plaintiff for bringing it, while it is still pending.” Fender v. Ramsey & Phillips, 131 Ga. 440, 443 (62 S. E. 527).

4. Where the plaintiff sued to recover for timber cut and carried away by the defendant as a wilful trespasser, and the defendant by way of amendment to his answer sought to set up a cross-action for attorney’s fees and expenses on the ground that the plaintiff had acted in bad faith by failing to disclose his claim at an earlier time “and in bringing this action” the court did not err in excluding evidence as to the defendant’s alleged expenses and in sustaining the plaintiff’s oral motion to dismiss the allegations and prayers for attorney’s fees and expenses. Fender v. Ramsey & Phillips, 131 Ga. 440 (2), supra; Busbee v. Sellers, 71 Ga. App. 26 (2), supra; Ellis v. Millen Hotel Co., 192 Ga. 66, 70 (14 S. E. 2d 565); Randolph v. Merchants &c. Loan Co., 58 Ga. App. 566, 572 (199 S. E. 549). Under these circumstances it was not harmful for the, court to allow the plaintiff to dismiss his petition “with the right to refile same within a period of six months as provided by law.”

Judgment affirmed.

Nichols and Bell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 S.E.2d 436, 101 Ga. App. 563, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 940, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wallace-v-jones-gactapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack