Manry v. Little, 148 S.E. 312 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929). · Go Syfert
Manry v. Little, 148 S.E. 312 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
4 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Cited for

No citing cases on record.

Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Manry
v.
Little
19589.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
May 15, 1929.
Published opinion
148 S.E. 312
1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 511
John F. Echols, for plaintiff in error., T. L. Slappey, Homer Watlcins, contra.
Beoyxes.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
Beoyxes, C. J.

1. A “demurrer, being a critic, must itself be free from imperfections.” Douglas &c. Ry. Co. v. Swindle, 2 Ga. App. 550 (4) (59 S. E. 600).

(a) “A general demurrer enables the party to assail every substantial imperfection in the pleadings of the opposite side without particularizing any of them in his demurrer. . . A special demurrer goes to the structure merely, and not to the substance, and it must distinctly and particularly specify wherein the defect lies. The party demurring must lay, as it were, his finger on the very point, otherwise the demurrer may not be noticed.” Martin v. Bartow Iron Works, 35 Ga. 320, 323.

2. Under the above-stated ruling a special demurrer in the instant case, attacking a paragraph of the petition “on the ground that said paragraph is a conclusion of the pleader and that said paragraph is vague and indefinite, and not plead with the particularity required by law,” is itself too vague and indefinite to raise any question for the consideration of the court. Darien Bank v. Clifton, 156 Ga. 65 (2) (118 S. E. 641).

3. The petition as amended set out a cause of action and was not subject to general demurrer, nor to any of the special grounds of demurrer interposed, and the court properly so held.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. John F. Echols, for plaintiff in error. T. L. Slappey, Homer Watlcins, contra.