Affidavit amendable by inserting proper venue.

- Where the heading of venue of an affidavit made under former Code 1933, § 3-509 (see O.C.G.A. § 9-2-63), for the purpose of recommencing action voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, was by mistake incorrectly stated to be in a state and county other than the state and county where it was actually signed and sworn to, and it appeared from the jurat that it was signed and sworn to in the proper jurisdiction (the officer before whom the affidavit was made and who took the oath of the affiant being presumed to have properly performed the officer's duty, and having jurisdiction in the county where the affidavit was actually signed and sworn to, and not having jurisdiction in the county incorrectly stated in the heading), the judge did not err in allowing such affidavit to be amended by striking therefrom the incorrect venue and inserting in lieu thereof the proper venue. Southern Grocery Stores, Inc. v. Kelly, 52 Ga. App. 551, 183 S.E. 924 (1936).

Affidavit amendable by attaching verified copy of mortgage.

- Where an affidavit, made as the foundation for the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage, recites that the mortgage is "annexed" to it, the affidavit is, upon the trial of an issue formed by a counter affidavit, subject to amendment by attaching thereto a verified copy of the mortgage referred to in the affidavit. Stanfield v. Darby, 45 Ga. App. 686, 165 S.E. 864 (1932).

Omissions constituted amendable defects cured by verdict and judgment.

- Where a judgment had been rendered against the defendant and the surety on the defendant's replevy bond, upon the trial of an issue arising upon the foreclosure of a landlord's lien for supplies, as provided in O.C.G.A. §§ 44-14-340 and44-14-550, the judgment was not subject to arrest upon the ground that it appeared from the record that no demand for payment had been made upon the defendant, and that it did not appear why such demand was not made as required by the statute as to affidavits as the basis for the foreclosure of such liens, because the omissions referred to constituted amendable defects which were cured by the verdict and judgment. McBride v. Sconyers, 46 Ga. App. 235, 167 S.E. 309 (1933).

Affidavit amendable by identifying plaintiff as corporation.

- Where, in an affidavit to foreclose a mortgage on crops, the name of the plaintiff does not itself import a corporation and there is no allegation as to its corporate entity, it is not erroneous for the trial court to allow the plaintiff to amend the same by inserting the word "Incorporated" after its name therein, and to refuse to dismiss the affidavit. Taliaferro v. J.S. Cowart & Son, 47 Ga. App. 730, 171 S.E. 406 (1933).

Affidavits of foreclosure of mortgages are amendable to the same extent as ordinary petitions. Miller Serv., Inc. v. Miller, 77 Ga. App. 413, 48 S.E.2d 761 (1948).

Judgment conclusive where unaccrued payments could have been put in issue by amendment.

- In an action for the foreclosure of a bill of sale on personal property to secure a debt wherein the affidavit alleges the whole debt to be due, but the evidence shows a part of the payments provided for in the instrument sought to be foreclosed are past due and other payments not yet accrued, the judgment, which contains provisions for the control of the surplus of the funds derived from the sale of the property so as to protect the lien created for the unaccrued installments of the debt, is conclusive between the parties because the unaccrued payments could have been put in issue by amendment. Miller Serv., Inc. v. Miller, 77 Ga. App. 413, 48 S.E.2d 761 (1948).

Laborer's lien does not rest upon contract. Waller v. Morris, 78 Ga. App. 821, 52 S.E.2d 583 (1949).

Judgment in laborer's lien foreclosure is res judicata only as to particular debt involved and does not prevent plaintiff from thereafter suing the defendant for items of debt of a different nature, though testimony as to these debts was given in the trial of the laborer's lien case. Waller v. Morris, 78 Ga. App. 821, 52 S.E.2d 583 (1949).

Affidavits that are the foundation of legal proceedings shall be amendable to the same extent as ordinary petitions and pleas. Southern Grocery Stores, Inc. v. Kelly, 52 Ga. App. 551, 183 S.E. 924 (1936).

Claim affidavit is amendable by member of partnership.

- An affidavit as the basis of a claim for personal property, as provided in former Code 1933, § 39-801 (see O.C.G.A. § 9-13-90), was amendable to the same extent as ordinary petitions, and such affidavit may be made by the person claiming title to the property or by the person's agent; a member of a partnership was an agent of the partnership and as such was authorized to execute the claim affidavit on behalf of the partnership. GMAC v. Allen, 59 Ga. App. 614, 1 S.E.2d 705 (1939); Roberts v. Wilson, 198 Ga. 428, 31 S.E.2d 707 (1944).

Landlord's dispossessory warrant affidavit amendable by striking one of two grounds.

- Where the affidavit of a landlord in a dispossessory warrant action alleged that the tenant "fails to pay rent now due on said house and premises (or that said tenant is holding said house and premises over and beyond the term for which same were rented or leased to the tenant)," and where the tenant moved to dismiss the affidavit for the reason that it was stated in the disjunctive and there was no cause of action set out, and the landlord offered an amendment striking that part of the affidavit in parentheses and stating therein that the landlord elects to proceed alone on the single ground, to-wit, that the said tenant "fails to pay rent now due on the said house and premises," it was not error to allow such amendment over the objection that the affidavit could not be amended. Wilensky v. Agoos, 74 Ga. App. 688, 41 S.E.2d 182 (1947).

Amendment to landlord's dispossessory warrant affidavit not subject to motion to dismiss.

- In dispossessory warrant proceeding, allegation that the tenant failed to pay rent due, or that the tenant was holding over and beyond the tenant's term, to which the defendant filed a counter affidavit, denying that there was any rent due or that the tenant was holding the premises over and beyond the tenant's term, and the plaintiff then amended the proceeding by striking the allegation that the defendant failed to pay rent due and by alleging that the defendant was a tenant at sufferance who had refused the plaintiff's demand for possession on a certain date, such amendment did not add a new and distinct cause of action and was not subject to the general demurrer (now motion to dismiss) interposed thereto on such ground. Hunter v. Ranitz, 88 Ga. App. 182, 76 S.E.2d 542 (1953).

No error in allowing amendment possibly inconsistent with part of original allegations.

- Under this section, trial court did not err in allowing an amendment to the affidavit of illegality, although it may have been in part inconsistent with the allegations of the original pleadings so far as the question of ownership was concerned. Jack Fred Co. v. Lago, 96 Ga. App. 675, 101 S.E.2d 165 (1957) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-10-130).

Defects in garnishments cured.

- Since affidavits filed in support of legal proceedings are amendable as provided by O.C.G.A. § 9-10-130, assuming there were technical defects in the issuance of the garnishments, these defects were cured at the hearing on the traverses where the orders of the trial court (although finding them technically correct) dismissed them as moot because of the satisfaction of the indebtedness. Young v. Bank of Quitman, 180 Ga. App. 491, 349 S.E.2d 510 (1986).

Cited in McDonald v. W.W. Kimball Co., 144 Ga. 105, 86 S.E. 234 (1915); Collins v. Armour Fertilizer Works, 18 Ga. App. 533, 89 S.E. 1054 (1916); Vandalsem v. Caldwell, 33 Ga. App. 88, 125 S.E. 716 (1924); Simpson v. Jones, 182 Ga. 544, 186 S.E. 558 (1936); Veneer Mfg. Co. v. Hill, 72 Ga. App. 28, 32 S.E.2d 838 (1945); Frost Motor Co. v. Pierce, 72 Ga. App. 447, 33 S.E.2d 910 (1945); Heath v. Costello, 76 Ga. App. 94, 44 S.E.2d 919 (1947); Wilson v. Fulton Metal Bed Mfg. Co., 88 Ga. App. 884, 78 S.E.2d 360 (1953); Perry v. Smith, 91 Ga. App. 538, 86 S.E.2d 345 (1955); Hardy v. George C. Murdock Freight Lines, 99 Ga. App. 459, 108 S.E.2d 739 (1959); Bowman v. Quick, 106 Ga. App. 213, 126 S.E.2d 536 (1962); Jackson v. Fincher, 128 Ga. App. 152, 195 S.E.2d 765 (1973); Smith v. Security Mtg. Investors, 139 Ga. App. 635, 229 S.E.2d 115 (1976); Rickert v. Hill Aircraft & Leasing Corp., 143 Ga. App. 536, 239 S.E.2d 176 (1977); Green v. Carver State Bank, 178 Ga. App. 798, 344 S.E.2d 507 (1986).

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 61A Am. Jur. 2d, Pleading, §§ 771, 772.

C.J.S.

- 71 C.J.S., Pleading, § 415.