Cameron v. Moore
Supreme Court of Georgia
Complaint, in Troup Superior Court. Tried before Judge Hill, May Term, 1851. This was an action of complaint, the declaration being in the form prescribed for action on account by the Act of 1847.* On the trial, the facts as agreed upon by the parties, were that the defendant did use and occupy the house for which rent was claimed, and for the time alleged; and that it was the house of plaintiff, but that there was no agreement as to what amount of rent the defendant should…
Read the full summary
Complaint, in Troup Superior Court. Tried before Judge Hill, May Term, 1851. This was an action of complaint, the declaration being in the form prescribed for action on account by the Act of 1847.* On the trial, the facts as agreed upon by the parties, were that the defendant did use and occupy the house for which rent was claimed, and for the time alleged; and that it was the house of plaintiff, but that there was no agreement as to what amount of rent the defendant should pay, and that plaintiff expected and relied on proving that the rent was reasonably worth fifty dollars per annum, as…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Nisbet, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] It is clear that the Act of 1847 makes a writ or complaint, in the form which it prescribes, a sufficient writ, in all cases within its provisions. The Legislature, beyond question, intended to dispense with the Common Law pleadings, and the pleadings which have grown up under our own Statute, and to say that in the cases enumerated, the form embodied in the Act should b'e a good declaration. Whether they have wisely so enacted, is not the question; the only question, these things being so, in this case, is this, to wit: is this case within…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Henry Darling Inc. v. Harvey-Given Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1930
- Floyd v. MorganCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
- Crews v. RobersonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- Wright v. PearsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934