Brant v. Brant, 71 S.E.2d 209 (Ga. 1952). · Go Syfert
Brant v. Brant, 71 S.E.2d 209 (Ga. 1952). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Sutton v. Sutton (ga, 1968-03-07)
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Sutton v. Sutton (2×)
Ga. · 1968 · signal: see · confidence high
See Brant v. Brant, 209 Ga. 151 ( 71 SE2d 209 ); Code § 30-105 (as amended by Ga. L. 1967, p. 761).
cited Cited "see" Mote v. Seitz
Ga. · 1963 · signal: see · confidence high
See Whaley v. Ellis, 209 Ga. 147 ( 71 SE2d 209 ) and the cases there cited.
cited Cited "see" State Highway Department v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.
Ga. · 1961 · signal: see · confidence high
See Whaley v. Ellis, 209 Ga. 147 ( 71 S. E. 2d 209 ), and Lively v. Thompson, 209 Ga. 425 ( 73 S. E. 2d 90 ), and cases cited.
Brant
v.
Brant
17883.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jun 9, 1952.
71 S.E.2d 209
0. Frank Brant, Wm. J. Neville and W. G. Neville, for plaintiff in error., J. Henry Howard and Harry H. Hunter, contra.
Duckworth, Atkinson.
Cited by 3 opinions  |  Published
Duckworth, Chief Justice.

On demurrer all properly pleaded allegations in the petition are admitted to be true, the demurrant denying the right of the petitioner to the relief sought. Code, § 81-304; Citizens & Southern National Bank v. King, 184 Ga. 238 (190 S. E. 857); City of Albany v. Lippitt, 191 Ga. 756 (13 S. E. 2d, 807); Collier v. Mayflower Apartments, 196 Ga. 419 (26 S. E. 2d, 731). The petitioner here alleges that the parties lived together as man and wife until the petitioner “separated from the defendant on November 14, 1951,” and the admission on demurrer that the above facts are true precludes the attack that the petition is fatally defective in that it does not allege a separation. The ground of divorce here is cruel treatment, which requires no definite period of separation under Code (Ann. Supp.) § 30-102 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 90, 91; 1951, pp. 744, 745). The petition alleges a cause of action, and the court did not err in overruling the demurrer thereto.

[*152] No. 17883. Submitted May 12, 1952 Decided June 9, 1952. 0. Frank Brant, Wm. J. Neville and W. G. Neville, for plaintiff in error. J. Henry Howard and Harry H. Hunter, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P.J., not participating.