Legal Opinion

Endicott v. Grogan

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 9, 1952No. 34007PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFelton, J.

The demurrer to the petition should have been sustained. If the petition is construed as one for a money rule under Code § 9-617, it did not allege the essentials of a money *151rule. A right to a money rule under this Code section depends upon the existence of the relation of attorney and client, and is limited to the client. Breen v. Phillips, 169 Ga. 13 (1a) (149 S. E. 565); Knight v. Rogers, 22 Ga. App. 308 (95 S. E. 997); Smith v. International Lawyers, 35 Ga. App. 158 (132 S. E. 245). In the instant case, there was no relationship of attorney and client between the plaintiff and the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. McDonald v. NapierSupreme Court of Georgia · 1853
  2. Smith v. International LawyersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
  3. Carson v. BlairCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
  4. Breen v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
  5. Knight v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. MacNerland v. BarnesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
  2. John L. Burns, Inc. v. Gulf Oil Corp.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 1967
  3. Hilton v. BazemoreCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API