Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, Nos. 15118, 15119.

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
Writing for the CourtDUCKWORTH
Citation33 S.E.2d. 701
PartiesDARLING STORES CORPORATION. v. BEATUS. BEATUS. v. DARLING STORES CORPORATION.
Docket NumberNos. 15118, 15119.
Decision Date04 April 1945

33 S.E.2d. 701

DARLING STORES CORPORATION.
v.
BEATUS.
BEATUS.
v.
DARLING STORES CORPORATION.

Nos. 15118, 15119.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

April 4, 1945.


Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; Walter C. Hendrix, Judge.

Action by Darling Stores Corporation against Wilham Beatus and others involving title to realty. Judgment for defendants and plaintiff brings error, and defendants file a cross-bill.

Judgment affirmed and cross-bill dismissed.

See also, Ga.App, 33 S.E.2d 37.

Bond Almand and Geo. & John L. Westmoreland, all of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

Isaac M. Wengrow and Albert E. Mayer, both of Atlanta, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court.

DUCKWORTH, Justice.

1. A ruling on a general demurrer to a petition is a judgment on the merits of the case. Hadden v. Fuqua, 192 Ga. 668, 675, 16 S.E.2d 737, and citations.

2. "A judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction shall be conclusive between the same parties and their privies as to all matters put in issue, or which under the rules of law might have been put in issue in the cause wherein the judgment was rendered, until such judgment shall be reversed or set aside." Code, § 110-501. Such judgment may be pleaded in bar of another suit for the same cause. Code, § 110-504.

3. While in the language of the statute in the defense of res judicata the subject matter in issue in the former suit must have been between the "same parties, " it is not required that all the parties on the respective sides of the litigation in the two cases shall have been identical, but it is sufficient as to identity of parties if those by and against whom the defense of res judicata is invoked in the latter case were real parties at interest or privies as to the controversy in the former case. Crider v. Harris, 183 Ga. 695, 697, 189 S.E. 519; Mitchell v. Turner, 190 Ga. 485, 9 S.E.2d 621; National Life & Accident Co. v. Leo, 50 Ga.App. 473(1), 178 S.E. 322.

4. "The doctrine of res judicata may be applied where actions between the same parties in relation to the same subject

[33 S.E.2d. 702]

matter are pending at the same time, and a judgment is rendered in one of such actions. It is immaterial whether the action in which the judgment is interposed as an estoppel was commenced before or after the action in which the adjudication was made. This rule is not affected by the failure to plead the pendency of the latter action." 30 Am. Jur. 948, § 214.

5. In Darling Stores Corporation v. Beatus, 197 Ga. 125, 28...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 practice notes
  • Smith v. AIRTOUCH CELLULAR OF GEORGIA, No. A00A0710
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 18 Mayo 2000
    ...failure to plead the pendency of the latter action. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215(4), 33 S.E.2d 701 Thus, the trial court properly granted summary judgment against the plaintiffs based on the doctrine of res judicata. Judgment affirmed. BLAC......
  • Dixon v. Dixon, No. 18728
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • 13 Octubre 1954
    ...Revels v. Kilgo, 157 Ga. 39(b), 121 S.E. 209; Smith v. Bird, 189 Ga. 105, 5 S.E.2d 336; Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215(1), 33 S.E.2d 701. Where, as here, the petition in one count alleged that the deed sought to be canceled was either a forgery or that the signatures thereto we......
  • A. R. Hudson Realty, Inc. v. Hood, No. 57714
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 15 Octubre 1979
    ...does mean that those who invoke the defense and against whom it is invoked must be the same. Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215, 33 S.E.2d 701." Ritchie Gas of Cornelia v. Ferguson, 111 Ga.App. 187, 188, 140 S.E.2d 925, 926 (1965). For a definitive discussion of the finer distingui......
  • Sampson v. Ga. Dep't of Juvenile Justice, No. A14A0474.
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 31 Julio 2014
    ...claim raised concerning the merits of that ruling is barred by res judicata”). 12.Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215, 215(3), 33 S.E.2d 701 (1945). 13.Richards v. Jefferson County, Ala., 517 U.S. 793, 797(II) n. 4, 116 S.Ct. 1761, 135 L.Ed.2d 76 (1996) (citations omitted); accord P......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
21 cases
  • Smith v. AIRTOUCH CELLULAR OF GEORGIA, No. A00A0710
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 18 Mayo 2000
    ...failure to plead the pendency of the latter action. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215(4), 33 S.E.2d 701 Thus, the trial court properly granted summary judgment against the plaintiffs based on the doctrine of res judicata. Judgment affirmed. BLAC......
  • Dixon v. Dixon, No. 18728
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Georgia
    • 13 Octubre 1954
    ...Revels v. Kilgo, 157 Ga. 39(b), 121 S.E. 209; Smith v. Bird, 189 Ga. 105, 5 S.E.2d 336; Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215(1), 33 S.E.2d 701. Where, as here, the petition in one count alleged that the deed sought to be canceled was either a forgery or that the signatures thereto we......
  • A. R. Hudson Realty, Inc. v. Hood, No. 57714
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 15 Octubre 1979
    ...does mean that those who invoke the defense and against whom it is invoked must be the same. Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215, 33 S.E.2d 701." Ritchie Gas of Cornelia v. Ferguson, 111 Ga.App. 187, 188, 140 S.E.2d 925, 926 (1965). For a definitive discussion of the finer dist......
  • Sampson v. Ga. Dep't of Juvenile Justice, No. A14A0474.
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (Georgia)
    • 31 Julio 2014
    ...claim raised concerning the merits of that ruling is barred by res judicata”). 12.Darling Stores Corp. v. Beatus, 199 Ga. 215, 215(3), 33 S.E.2d 701 (1945). 13.Richards v. Jefferson County, Ala., 517 U.S. 793, 797(II) n. 4, 116 S.Ct. 1761, 135 L.Ed.2d 76 (1996) (citations omitted); accord P......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT