Krasner v. Rutledge
| Decision Date | 13 October 1948 |
| Docket Number | 16326. |
| Citation | 49 S.E.2d 864,204 Ga. 380 |
| Parties | KRASNER v. RUTLEDGE. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The allegations of the petition seeking damages under the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, as amended, 50 U.S C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq., because of alleged overcharges in rent, were sufficient to set forth a cause of action, and the trial court did not err in overruling the defendant's demurrer.
Ollie Rutledge filed in the Civil Court of Fulton County, against Norman Krasner, a petition which alleged substantially the following: The action was brought by the plaintiff as tenant against the defendant as landlord under the provisions of the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, act of January 30, 1942 of the U.S. Congress, C. 25, 56 Stat. 23 and amendments thereto, 50 U.S. C.A.Appendix, § 901 et seq. On July 28, 1947, the plaintiff moved into the premises known as 491 Capitol Avenue, S.W. In accordance with the said act, the U.S. Office of Price Administration had fixed the maximum rent per week of the apartment, including all services furnished, and though an increase was subsequently granted, nevertheless the defendant did demand and collect from the plaintiff during the period from July 28, 1947, to April 22, 1948, an overcharge of $265. The defendant is, therefore, subject to damages in treble the amount of said overcharge, or $795, plus reasonable attorney's fees, for which amount the plaintiff prayed for a judgment.
The exception is to a judgment overruling the defendant's general demurrer.
Norman Krasner, pro se, and D. W. Krasner, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
H. C. Morgan and F. C. Burt, both of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
ATKINSON Presiding Justice (after stating the foregoing facts.)
The defendant demurred on the grounds, (1-3) that the petition fails to set forth a cause of action, legal or constitutional, and fails to set forth any constitutional act or acts of Congress under which the action could be brought, or legally pursued.
The Housing and Rent Act of 1947, 50 U.S. C.A. Appendix, § 1881, et seq., amending the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942, 50 U.S. C.A. Appendix, § 901 et seq. as amended, declares in part: U.S. Code Congressional Service, 80th Congress First Session 1947, pp. 200, 206. The Housing and Rent Act of 1948 extended rent control to March 31, 1949, 50 U.S. C.A. Appendix, § 1894. U.S. Code Congressional Service 1948, No. 4, 80th Congress Second Session, p. 722.
The trial court did not err in overruling the above grounds of demurrer, since a statute is presumed to be valid and constitutional until the contrary appears. For similar reasons the trial court did not err in overruling the 7th ground of the defendant's demurrer, complaining that the action is brought under an act of Congress and amendments thereto in an effort to exercise was powers, and said war having terminated, any term such as 'Defense Area' or 'Defense Rental Area' is an imaginary phrase, and in truth has no actual or lawful meaning.
Ground 4 of the demurrer complains that the act and amendments thereto under which the petition is brought are unconstitutional, in that the same are in violation of the provisions of article 1, section 1, and article 2, section 1, and article 3, section 1, of the constitution of the United States, and the 5th amendment to said constitution, and further violates article 4, section 2, and the 7th amendment to said constitution of the United States.
In order to raise a question as to the constitutionality of a 'law', Code Ann.Supp., § 2-3704, art. 6, § 2, par. 4, the statute which the party challenges, and the provision of the constitution alleged to have been violated, must both be clearly specified, and it must also be shown wherein the statute violates such constitutional provision. Abel v. State, 190 Ga. 651, 10 S.E.2d 198; Dade County v. State of Georgia, 201 Ga. 241, 245(2b), 39 S.E.2d 473; Price v. State, 202 Ga. 205(1), 42 S.E.2d 728.
Ground 4 of the demurrer does not state wherein or in what respect the Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 violates the stated provisions of the Federal Constitution.
Ground 5 of the demurrer, complaining that the act and amendments thereto under which the petition is brought are unconstitutional, in that the same discriminates against...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Franklin v. Harper
... ... asserted. Stegall v. Southwest Georgia Regional Housing ... Authority, 197 Ga. 571(1), 548, ... [55 S.E.2d 229] Kansner v. Rutledge, 204 Ga. 380, ... 382, 49 S.E.2d 864 ... 3 ... Though no contention is made that this act or any section ... thereof ... ...
-
Staub v. City of Baxley
...S.E. 680, 687—688; Stegall v. Southwest Georgia Regional Housing Authority, 1944, 197 Ga. 571, 30 S.E.2d 196; Krasner v. Rutledge, 1948, 204 Ga. 380, 383, 49 S.E.2d 864, 866. We conclude that the decision of the Court of Appeals does not rest on an adequate nonfederal ground and that we hav......
-
Wright v. State, 21430
...Ga. 187, 188(3), 178 S.E. 707; Manufacturers Trust Co. v. Wilby-Kincey Service Corp., 204 Ga. 273, 274, 49 S.E.2d 514; Krasner v. Rutledge, 204 Ga. 380, 382, 49 S.E.2d 864. The United States Supreme Court has held that a statute is not unconscionably vague where its provisions employ words ......
-
Prince v. Thompson, 20835
...S.E. 248.' Manufacturers Trust Co. v. Wilby-Kincey Service Corp., 204 Ga. 273, 274(2), 49 S.E.2d 514, 515. See also Krasner v. Rutledge, 204 Ga. 380, 382, 49 S.E.2d 864; Smith v. Brogan, 207 Ga. 642, 643, 63 S.E. 2d 647; Lanier v. Suttles, 212 Ga. 154(1), 156, 91 S.E.2d 21; Richmond Concret......