Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. Bailey
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Action for damages; from cit}’ coiirt of Atlanta — Judge Eeid. June 11, 1910. i
1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.
1. Under the rules of the city court of Atlanta, where an amendment was filed in response to a ruling invoked by a special demurrer, and in pursuance of an order expressly granting leave to amend, and was not objected to within the time and as otherwise provided by the rules, the court did not err in refusing' to strike the amendment, which was merely amplificative in character. The court,'by an order nunc pro tune, might formally have allowed the amendment; but this is not necessary, where the amendment filed is deemed by the court to be in compliance with the requirement to amend.
2. A party…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. HendersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Paulk v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
- Oklahoma Publishing Co. v. KendallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. ShawCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
- Bell v. WashamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.