Legal Opinion

Bartow Guano Co. v. Adair

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 16, 1923No. 13284, 13285PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) It was the right of the plaintiff under the law to make an amendment of the nature indicated in the foregoing statement. In the case of Akin v. Ordinary, 54 Ga. 59 (4), (5), it was said: “If a plaintiff should sue on a promissory note in the statutory form which the law requires to be stamped, and the note could not be read in evidence for the want of a stamp on it, the plaintiff might amend his declaration by adding the common count of money had and received of the plaintiff, or paid by the plaintiff for the use and benefit of the defendant, and .on proof…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Akin v. OrdinarySupreme Court of Georgia · 1875
  2. Cox v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  3. Codman v. RoberdsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  4. Georgia Iron & Coal Co. v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  5. Griner v. Baggs & PerryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Kraft v. Rowland & RowlandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
  2. Beadles v. BowenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  3. Glynn Plymouth, Inc. v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
  4. Ingalls Iron Works Co. v. Standard Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
  5. Suddath v. Blanchard & CalhounCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929

8 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