Legal Opinion

Henry v. Moss

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 27, 1959No. 37647PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Townsend, Judge.

The sole arguments of the plaintiff in error in support of his position that the general demurrer to the petition should have been'sustained are: (1) the agreement in question was a partnership agreement which was entirely speculative ini character, (2) the petition does not affirmatively allege that the business will not come into existence at some future time, and (3) the plaintiff has no right to compensation under the agreement except after the business comes into existence and makes profits from which he may be. paid, since the plaintiff, under his own allegations, agreed…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Beck v. Thompson & Taylor Spice Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  2. Douglas v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
  3. Marietta Publishing Co. v. Times Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  4. Moore v. DealCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  5. Moore v. DealSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Watson v. Sierra Contracting Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
  2. Cutcliffe v. ChesnutCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
  3. CCE Federal Credit Union v. ChesserCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  4. J. Mervin Harden v. Trw, Inc., a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1992
  5. Sayles v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API