Legal Opinion

Worth v. United Electric Supply Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 17, 1931No. 20564PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

The present case was commenced as a suit in the name of United Electric Supply Company as plaintiff. When the case was called for trial the presiding judge inquired as to the names of the parties at interest; whereupon counsel for the plaintiff responded that the name in which the suit was brought was a trade-name under ivhich J. E. Clark did business. A motion then being made by the defendant “to dismiss said suit because there was no party plaintiff,” counsel for the plaintiff offered, and the court allowed, the following amendment: “That the United Electric Supply Company is a trade name…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Eslinger v. HerndonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1924
  2. Charles v. Valdosta Foundry & Machine Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  3. Becker v. TruittCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  4. Bremen Foundry & Machine Works v. McLendonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. FarmerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
  2. Hudgins Contracting Co. v. RedmondSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  3. Smith v. Commissioners of Roads & RevenueSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
  4. Johnson & Johnson Construction Co. v. Pioneer Neon Supply Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API