Williams v. Commercial Tire Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Jordan, Judge.
Properly construed, this was an action on open account and not a suit on an unconditional contract in writing. Gordy Tire Co. v. Bulman, 96 Ga. App. 739 (1) (101 SE2d 220). Accordingly, the defendant’s answer which denied the allegations of indebtedness and demand for payment was sufficient to set forth an issuable defense to the action and the *88trial court erred in dismissing the answer and in entering a default judgment in behalf of the plaintiff. Jones v. Hodges, 21 Ga. App. 594 (1) (94 SE 831); De Soto Plantation Co. v. Hammett, 111 Ga. 24 (36 SE 304); Keiser v. American Exp.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- De Soto Plantation Co. v. HammettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Howard Piano Co. v. GloverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1910
- Chatham Abattoir & Packing Co. v. Painter Engineering Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- Gordy Tire Co. v. BulmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
- Jones v. HodgesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.