Winecoff v. Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Winecoff v. Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance

170 S.E. 215, 47 Ga. App. 197, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 343

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 13, 1933

Docket22834

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 170 S.E. 215 (Winecoff v. Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance) 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

Winecoff v. Fidelity Mutual Life Insurance, 170 S.E. 215, 47 Ga. App. 197, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 343 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

This was a suit upon two promissory notes executed by Central Realty Company and made payable to the plaintiff, and indorsed by W. F. Winecoff. Defendant Winecoff filed a plea and answer, which the court struck on demurrer, and a verdict was subsequently directed against both defendants and in favor of the plaintiff for the amount sued for, with interest, attorney’s fees, costs of court, and a special lien against real estate described in the plaintiff’s petition. The plea and answer, properly construed (most strongly against the pleader), was so uncertain and evasive that it amounted in law to an admission of all the allegations in the plaintiff’s petition, and it was properly stricken on demurrer. The answer having been stricken, the direction of the verdict in favor of the plaintiff was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

This was a suit upon two promissory notes executed by Central Realty Company and made payable to the plaintiff, and indorsed by W. F. Winecoff. Defendant Winecoff filed a plea and answer, which the court struck on demurrer, and a verdict was subsequently directed against both defendants and in favor of the plaintiff for the amount sued for, with interest, attorney’s fees, costs of court, and a special lien against real estate described in the plaintiff’s petition. The plea and answer, properly construed (most strongly against the pleader), was so uncertain and evasive that it amounted in law to an admission of all the allegations in the plaintiff’s petition, and it was properly stricken on demurrer. The answer having been stricken, the direction of the verdict in favor of the plaintiff was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

170 S.E. 215, 47 Ga. App. 197, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winecoff-v-fidelity-mutual-life-insurance-gactapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack