TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Vann v. Bice

Vann v. Bice, 194 S.E.2d 259 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 16, 1972
Docket
No. 47522
Judges
Quillian, Hall, Pannell
Citations
194 S.E.2d 259127 Ga. App. 5791972 Ga. App. LEXIS 958

Opinion — Quillian

Quillian, Judge.

The appellant filed a claim against the appellee for $350. The appellee filed an answer and counterclaim. The appellant then filed a motion for summary judgment which was supported by affidavits. The motion was set for a hearing on January 31, 1972. The appellee on January 31, 1972, the date of the hearing, filed an amendment to his answer together with an affidavit in which he stated that he was not indebted to the appellant and had in fact overpaid him in the amount of $77. At the hearing the trial judge on his own motion continued the hearing to "permit defendant (appellee) to amend and instructed counsel for both parties to submit memoranda briefs.” On June 5, 1972, the motion for summary judgment was overruled and the appellant appealed.

Held:

1. The appellant contends that the trial judge erred in considering the appellee’s affidavit because it was not filed prior to the date of the hearing and no order of the trial judge was entered allowing the same to be filed.

Code Ann.

§ 81A-156 (c) (Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 660; 1967, pp. 226, 238). However, in the case sub judice the trial judge continued the hearing and passed an order which allowed the appellee to amend. The purpose of the statute is to prevent a party from being surprised the day of the *580 hearing by an affidavit that he would not be in a position to answer. The enumeration of error is without merit.

Argued September 12, 1972 Decided November 16, 1972.

F. H. Boney, for appellant.

Joseph E. Loggins, for appellee.

2. There was a material issue of fact and the overruling of the motion for summary judgment was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Hall, P. J., and Pannell, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1978: 21981: 119782026peak 1978 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Wall v. Citizens & Southern Bank243 S.E.2d 271 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
  2. Benton Bros. Ford Co. v. Cotton States Mutual Insurance278 S.E.2d 40 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
  3. Fairington, Inc. v. Yeargin Construction Co.241 S.E.2d 608 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)

Most recent

  1. Benton Bros. Ford Co. v. Cotton States Mutual Insurance278 S.E.2d 40 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
  2. Wall v. Citizens & Southern Bank243 S.E.2d 271 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
  3. Fairington, Inc. v. Yeargin Construction Co.241 S.E.2d 608 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list