Airport Associates v. Audioptic Instructional Devices, Inc., 46751
Decision Date | 20 January 1972 |
Docket Number | No. 46751,No. 2,46751,2 |
Citation | 125 Ga.App. 325,187 S.E.2d 567 |
Parties | AIRPORT ASSOCIATES v. AUDIOPTIC INSTRUCTIONAL DEVICES, INC |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
J. E. Wilson, Hapeville, for appellant.
Archer, Patrick & Sidener, East Point, for appellee. Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. The Jack Jones pleading forms (Ga.L.1847, p. 490) were not repealed by the Civil Practice Act (Ga.L.1966 p. 609) and are still proper methods of pleading. The complaint here follows the form for recovery of personal property as set out in § 3390 of the Code of 1882 and is therefore sufficient. Any insufficiency in the description of property allegedly converted which is attached as an exhibit to the complaint would, under the new practice, not make the pleading subject to a motion to dismiss, as the proper procedure would be a motion for more definite statement. The motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was properly overruled.
2. The Defendant Airport Associates moved for summary judgment, denial of which is here appealed from. On the motion the court had for consideration the pleadings, answers to interrogatories and requests for admission, and the affidavit of one Rowland Barnes. The latter states that the property in question was seized from Robert Deaton, president of the plaintiff Audioptic Associates Ltd. and also president of Learning Research and Development Corp., which latter is not a party to this litigation, by deputy marshals of Fulton Civil Court in Case No. 343632 of that court and sold to the highest bidder on November 2, 1970, and that it was bought in at the sale by the defendant. It also appears that and that the property was in the possession of Deaton when picked up by the marshal. There is no information in the record as to the nature of the case 'in which' the property was sold, who the parties to that litigation were, or what judgment was rendered. We are left in the dark as to the entity from whom Deaton purchased the property, whether he did so individually, as president of the plaintiff, or as president of Learning Research, and whether title passed at the time the purchase arrangements were made.
The appellate courts simply cannot nor are they authorized by law to infer from statements of counsel in their briefs facts which never managed an introduction...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Maloy v. Dixon
...or the transcript for the purpose of demonstrating error or for supporting a claim of error. Airport Associates v. Audioptic Instructional Devices, Inc., 125 Ga.App. 325(2), 187 S.E.2d 567. Our 'decision must be made on the record sent to this court by the clerk of the court below and not u......
-
Anderson v. Oakley
...which never managed an introduction into or even a nodding acquaintance with the record.' Airport Associates, Inc. v. Audioptic Instructional Devices, Inc., 125 Ga.App. 325, 326, 187 S.E.2d 567, 568. There is no amendment of the pleadings here, in writing or otherwise, and no basis for our ......
-
Keno v. Alside, Inc.
...by the record; it may not be done by assertions appearing only in briefs or enumerations of error. Airport Assoc. v. Audioptics Instructional Devices, 125 Ga.App. 325(2), 187 S.E.2d 567; Jenkins v. Bd. of Zoning Appeals of City of Columbus, 122 Ga.App. 412, 177 S.E.2d 204. These enumeration......
-
Sanders v. State
...Buck LeCraw & Co., 225 Ga. 91, 166 S.E.2d 88; McRoy v. State, 131 Ga.App. 307(1), 205 S.E.2d 445; Airport Associates v. Audioptic Instructional Devices, Inc., 125 Ga.App. 325, 187 S.E.2d 567. Nevertheless, we examine the record to determine whether the defendant was denied his right to a sp......