Richardson v. Hairried
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Candler, Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The first question to be disposed of is whether the trial judge erred in disallowing the two proffered amendments to the answer. In this State the right of either party to amend pleadings is very broad, and the practice of allowing them is liberal. Jenkins v. Lane, 154 Ga. 454 (115 S. E. 126). “All parties, whether plaintiffs or defendants, in the superior or other courts, whether at law or in equity, may at any stage of the cause, as a matter of right, amend their pleadings in all respects, whether in matter of form or of substance,…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Jenkins v. LaneSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. ClarkeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- White v. LittleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
- Alabama Midland Railway Co. v. GuilfordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Mendel v. Miller & SonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Amear v. HallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Key v. StringerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- Wright v. AnthonySupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- Nauman v. McCoyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951
- Young Men's Christian Ass'n of Metropolitan Atlanta, Inc. v. BaileyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.