Legal Opinion

Harris v. Ackerman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 2, 1953No. 34413PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWorrill, J.

1. The general rule is that allegations in a petition must yield to contradictory facts shown in exhibits attached thereto. Equitable Credit &c. Co. v. Murray, 79 Ga. App. 795 (2) (54 S. E. 2d 650); Atlanta Journal Co. v. Doyal, 82 Ga. App. 321, 325 (60 S. E. 2d 802).

2. The name “Ackerman Construction Co.” imports a corporation, nothing to the contrary appearing (Carter v. Spiegel, May Stern Co., 45 Ga. App. 754, 166 S. E. 34);. and a check which is signed “Ackerman Construction Co. by Oliver P. Ackerman” is prima facie an obligation of Ackerman Construction Company and not the individual…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Atlanta Journal Co. v. DoyalCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
  2. Carter v. Spiegel, May Stern Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  3. Equitable Credit & Discount Co. v. MurrayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
  4. Atkins v. BrownSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1871
  5. Lawton v. SwihartIndiana Supreme Court · 1858

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Dell v. KugelCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1959
  2. Houston v. PollardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1961
  3. Spielberg v. McEntireCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  4. Republic Mortgage Corp. v. BeasleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  5. Miles v. State of GeorgiaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API