Legal Opinion

Varner v. Atlanta Laundries Inc.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided March 13, 1936No. 10816PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Beck, Presiding Justice.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) It has long been settled that an amendment to meet a ruling on a demurrer waives any right to except to the order sustaining the demurrer. When a demurrer to a petition is sustained, the plaintiff may either take the position that his petition is good and except to the order sustaining the demurrer, or he may acquiesce in the correctness of the ruling on the demurrer and amend to meet it. By amending to meet the demurrer he agrees to the correctness of the *154ruling, and can not thereafter except to the ruling. It is immaterial whether…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Seibert v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
  2. Walton v. SikesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
  3. Caldwell v. HillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  4. Baker v. CallowaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  5. Norton v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1931

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Emmet & Co. v. Catholic Health EastNew York Supreme Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API