Ward v. Chapman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Ward v. Chapman

156 S.E. 283, 42 Ga. App. 283, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 348

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided November 11, 1930·No. 20813·Published

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Under the facts of the case as disclosed by the record the court did not err in sustaining the motion to dismiss the affidavit of illegality. The case of Roney v. McCall, 128 Ga. 249, cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, is distinguished by its particular facts from this case.

Judgment affirmed.

LuJce and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur. McDaniel, Neely & Marshall, for plaintiff in error. V. II. Gaddis, II. G. Holbrook, contra.

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

Broyles, C. J.

Under the facts of the case as disclosed by the record the court did not err in sustaining the motion to dismiss the affidavit of illegality. The case of Roney v. McCall, 128 Ga. 249, cited in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, is distinguished by its particular facts from this case.

Judgment affirmed.

LuJce and Bloodworth, JJ., eoneur. McDaniel, Neely & Marshall, for plaintiff in error. V. II. Gaddis, II. G. Holbrook, contra.

Ward v. Chapman, 156 S.E. 283, 42 Ga. App. 283, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 348 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

156 S.E. 283 (Ward v. Chapman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related