Wynn v. Finley

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Wynn v. Finley

205 S.E.2d 42, 131 Ga. App. 52, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1323

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 21, 1974

Docket48807

StatusPublished

This text of 205 S.E.2d 42 (Wynn v. Finley) 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

Wynn v. Finley, 205 S.E.2d 42, 131 Ga. App. 52, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1323 (Ga. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Pannell, Judge.

This is an appeal from a final judgment rendered against appellant in an action on contract submitted to the trial judge for decision without the intervention of a jury. The enumeration of errors goes to the alleged deficiency of the evidence to support the trial judge’s findings of facts, and to the failure to continue the case when an amendment was filed at the trial, which, according to appellant’s contention, changed the action from one on an oral contract to one on a written contract. Held:

1. The evidence, although conflicting, was amply sufficient to support the findings of the trial judge and the amount of the judgment.

2. An examination of the record discloses the original complaint and the complaint as amended asserted actions on the written contract. The ground of [53]*53the enumeration of error on the denial of the motion for continuance is, therefore, not supported by the record and is without merit. Johnson v. State, 123 Ga. App. 857 (182 SE2d 701); Baker v. State, 122 Ga. App. 587 (7) (178 SE2d 278).

Submitted January 10, 1974. Decided February 21, 1974. W. M. Mathews, Jr., for appellant. Theodore E. Smith, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Evans, J., concur.

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

Pannell, Judge.

This is an appeal from a final judgment rendered against appellant in an action on contract submitted to the trial judge for decision without the intervention of a jury. The enumeration of errors goes to the alleged deficiency of the evidence to support the trial judge’s findings of facts, and to the failure to continue the case when an amendment was filed at the trial, which, according to appellant’s contention, changed the action from one on an oral contract to one on a written contract. Held:

1. The evidence, although conflicting, was amply sufficient to support the findings of the trial judge and the amount of the judgment.

2. An examination of the record discloses the original complaint and the complaint as amended asserted actions on the written contract. The ground of [53]*53the enumeration of error on the denial of the motion for continuance is, therefore, not supported by the record and is without merit. Johnson v. State, 123 Ga. App. 857 (182 SE2d 701); Baker v. State, 122 Ga. App. 587 (7) (178 SE2d 278).

Submitted January 10, 1974. Decided February 21, 1974. W. M. Mathews, Jr., for appellant. Theodore E. Smith, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Eberhardt, P. J., and Evans, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 S.E.2d 42, 131 Ga. App. 52, 1974 Ga. App. LEXIS 1323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wynn-v-finley-gactapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack