Legal Opinion
Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance v. Hill
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided January 20, 1966No. 41716, 41741PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Eberhardt, Judge.
Since the cross appeal deals with the matter of pleadings we first dispose of the issues raised in it.
Defendant demurred to the petition on the ground that there was not a full assignment of the chose in action and as a matter of law there could be no partial assignment.
It appears from the allegations of the petition that the payment made by Rhode Hill’s father in the sum of $432 was prior to the settlement by Pennsylvania Threshermen with Jan Tabaka, in connection with which it took from him the assignment sued upon. We must, therefore, consider the effect of Mr. Hill’s…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Lovejoy v. MurraySupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Southern Railway Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Donaldson v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. EndsleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Crosby v. Savannah Electric & Power Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Mayer v. TurnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Woodstock Road Investment Properties v. LacyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. CumbieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
- Gilmore v. Fulton-DeKalb Hospital AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.