From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Deich v. American Discount Company

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 16, 1962
107 Ga. App. 22 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)

Opinion

39779.

DECIDED OCTOBER 16, 1962. REHEARING DENIED NOVEMBER 15, 1962.

Traverse to entry of service. Savannah City Court. Before Judge Alexander.

Crawford, Leeb Calhoun, John R. Calhoun, for plaintiffs in error.

Kennedy Sognier, John G. Kennedy, Jr., contra.


A traverse of an entry of service must allege that it is filed at the first term after notice to the defendant ( Code § 81-214), and must deny the truth of the entry of service. Parker v. Rosenheim, 97 Ga. 769, 771 ( 25 S.E. 763); Sanford v. Bates, 99 Ga. 145 (1) ( 25 S.E. 35); City of Albany v. Parks, 61 Ga. App. 55 (2) ( 5 S.E.2d 680); Caye Co. v. Davidson, 94 Ga. App. 574 (1) ( 95 S.E.2d 746). While an amendment of a proper traverse may be made to make the sheriff a party (see Stone v. Richardson, 76 Ga. 97) "in order for a timely traverse, however made, to stand as such and furnish the basis of such an amendment . . . it must plainly and unequivocally deny the truth of the return as shown by the entry of service." Webb v. Armour Fertilizer Works, 21 Ga. App. 409, 410 ( 94 S.E. 610). Therefore, a traverse properly filed at the first term after notice but which fails specifically to deny the truth of the entry of service is not amendable at a subsequent term to so deny the truth of the entry.

Judgment affirmed. Carlisle, P. J., and Russell, J., concur.

DECIDED OCTOBER 16, 1962 — REHEARING DENIED NOVEMBER 15, 1962.


After judgment in an undefended trover action, defendants filed a traverse to the entry of service. The traverse alleged filing at the first term after notice to the defendants but did not specifically deny the truth of the entry. Plaintiff's motion to dismiss was granted and the case was appealed. This court reversed the judgment because the motion was not renewed after a material amendment. Deich v. American Discount Co., 104 Ga. App. 308 ( 121 S.E.2d 702). The amendment specifically denied the truth of the entry and was allowed five terms of court after the original traverse was filed. Additional motions to dismiss were made and finally sustained on the grounds that the original traverse, failing to deny the truth of the entry of service, was legally insufficient and that the amendment, being itself the only legally sufficient traverse, came too late.


Summaries of

Deich v. American Discount Company

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Oct 16, 1962
107 Ga. App. 22 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)
Case details for

Deich v. American Discount Company

Case Details

Full title:DEICH et al. v. AMERICAN DISCOUNT COMPANY

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Oct 16, 1962

Citations

107 Ga. App. 22 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)
129 S.E.2d 179

Citing Cases

Deich v. American Discount Co.

DECIDED MARCH 7, 1963. REHEARING DENIED MARCH 25, 1963. Certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Georgia — 107…

Deich v. American Discount Company

EBERHARDT, Judge. The Supreme Court of Georgia ( American Discount Co. v. Deich, 218 Ga. 726, 130 S.E.2d 595)…