Satlof v. State

• Decision Date: 06 December 1935
• Docket Number: 25114.
• Citation: 182 S.E. 864,52 Ga.App. 208
• Parties: SATLOF v. STATE.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

182 S.E. 864

52 Ga.App. 208

SATLOF v. STATE.

No. 25114.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, First Division

December 6, 1935

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Demurrer to original petition does not cover petition after it has been materially amended, and must be renewed or insisted upon after amendment has been allowed, if still relied on.

Overruling demurrers filed to original petition held not reversible error, where demurrers were not renewed or insisted on after petition was materially amended, although judge, in overruling demurrers, considered them as covering amended petition.

Order justified for reason other than that assigned will be affirmed.

Error from Superior Court, Muscogee County; C. F. McLaughlin Judge.

Petition for disbarment by the State against A. A. Satlof. To review an adverse judgment, defendant brings error.

Affirmed.

Geo. G Finch, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

A. J Perryman, Sol. Gen., of Columbus, for the State.

Syllabus OPINION.

BROYLES Chief Judge.

1. "A demurrer to the original petition does not cover the petition after it has been materially amended. Powell v. Cheshire, 70 Ga. 357, 48 Am.Rep. 572 (2b). If the demurrer is still relied upon, it should be renewed or insisted upon after the amendment has been allowed." General Accident, etc., Corp. v. Way, 20 Ga.App. 106(2), 92 S.E. 650. In the instant case, the demurrers filed to the original petition were not renewed nor insisted on after the petition was amended as to material matters; and, after the allowance of the amendment, the judge passed an order overruling the demurrers which had been interposed to the original petition only. Since the demurrers were not renewed to the amended petition and therefore could not cover it, the overruling of the demurrers affords no reason for a reversal of the judgment. The fact that the judge in overruling the demurrers considered them as covering the amended petition is immaterial. Where the order is proper and legally justified for a reason other than that assigned, the judgment will be affirmed. See Doe v. Roe, 20 Ga. 689(3), 65 Am.Dec. 639; Gillespie v. Macon, 19 Ga.App. 1, 2, 90 S.E. 970, and citations.

2. This was a petition for disbarment. After the demurrers, general and special, to the original petition were overruled evidence was introduced, and the court passed an order disbarring the defendant. In the bill of exceptions, that judgment is excepted to solely...