Dorough v. Johnson
Supreme Court of Georgia
Complaint. Before Judge Butt. Harris superior court. October term, 1898.
1Opinion of the CourtLumpkin, P. J.
T. The defendant below was not entitled to open and conclude, because he did not by admissions in his answer make out a prima facie case for the plaintiff and thus relieve him from the necessity of introducing evidence. Admissions made by a defendant for the purpose of gaining this advantage must be in his pleadings and not merely oral. Montgomery v. Hunt, 93 Ga. 438; Levens v. Smith, 102 Ga. 480; Southern Mutual Building & Loan Assn. v. Perry, 103 Ga. 800. In the case last cited, the admission referred to was embraced in the answer of the defendants, though this fact does not appear in the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Montgomery v. HuntSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Southern Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. PerrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Levens v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sorensen v. SorensenNebraska Supreme Court · 1903
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. MorganSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Reid v. SewellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- State Highway Department v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- DuBignon v. WrightSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.