Legal Opinion

Kraft v. Rowland & Rowland

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 11, 1925No. 15908PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.)

There was a demurrer to the original petition, and exceptions pendente lite were duly filed to the action of the court in overruling it. Although in the bill of exceptions error is assigned upon the exceptions pendente lite, there is no reference thereto in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and these exceptions will be treated as abandoned. The only grounds for reversal insisted upon are those referred to below.

Did the court err in allowing the amendment ? The original petition was a suit for the recovery of the value of services rendered by…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Baker v. Richmond City Mill WorksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  2. Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. TompkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  3. Maxwell v. HarrisonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850
  4. Alford v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
  5. Jackson v. BuiceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Studdard v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  2. Dixon v. Cassels Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
  3. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
  4. MILLICAN ELECTRIC CO. INC. v. FisherCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
  5. Watts v. RichCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934

31 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