Walsey v. American Fletcher Nat. Bank & Trust Co.
| Decision Date | 04 September 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 57833,57833 |
| Citation | 258 S.E.2d 760,151 Ga.App. 104 |
| Parties | WALSEY v. AMERICAN FLETCHER NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
David S. Eisenberg, Atlanta, for appellant.
Albert Sidney Johnson, Harmon W. Caldwell, Jr., Atlanta, for appellee.
This is an appeal from a summary judgment in favor of American Fletcher National Bank & Trust Company (the bank) in its action against Karen Walsey to collect on two promissory notes. The bank filed a motion in this court pursuant to Code Ann. § 6-1801 for damages contending that the appeal has been brought here for purposes of delay. We affirm the judgment of the court below, but deny the motion for damages.
In 1976 Karen Walsey and her husband executed two promissory notes, as co-makers, in favor of the bank. The principal amount of the smaller of the two notes was repaid, but $1,977.48 interest remains unpaid. Only a small portion of the principal amount of the larger note in the original amount of $150,000 was repaid and the bank filed suit against Walsey and her husband after demand for payment and proper notice of its intention to enforce the provision for payment of attorney's fees. The appellant's answer contended essentially that she did not receive the proceeds of the loans personally and there was therefore a failure of consideration which removed any liability as to her. Subsequently, the appellant's husband was voluntarily dismissed as a defendant pursuant to Code Ann. § 81A-141.
After taking Karen Walsey's deposition the bank filed its motion for summary judgment which was scheduled and postponed once at the request of appellant's counsel. At the rescheduled hearing on the motion, neither appellant nor her counsel appeared and after some effort to communicate with appellant's counsel, the court permitted the bank to present its motion. The motion was granted and judgment was entered for the unpaid principal, interest and attorney's fees. In her three enumerations of error, the appellant contends that the grant of summary judgment was error.
Code Ann. § 81A-156(e) provides, in pertinent part, as follows: In her affidavit submitted in opposition to the motion for summary judgment, the appellant merely swore that the substance of her answer to the complaint was true. This did not satisfy the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
ARA Transp. v. Barnes
...on a motion for summary judgment, do not raise factual issues that prevent granting of a summary judgment. Walsey v. American Fletcher Nat. Bank, 151 Ga.App. 104, 258 S.E.2d 760. In Walsey, we held that an affidavit in which the affiant merely swore that the substance of her answer to the c......
-
Hart v. Trust Co. of Columbus
...the requirement to set forth specific facts. More than conclusory allegations are required. Walsey v. American Fletcher Nat. Bank, etc., Co., 151 Ga.App. 104, 105, 258 S.E.2d 760 (1979); Meade v. Heimanson, 239 Ga. 177, 180, 236 S.E.2d 357 (1977); Hathcock v. National Bank of Ga., 147 Ga.Ap......
-
Great Atlantic & Pac. Tea Co., Inc. v. Burgess
...without merit as to admit of no other conclusion than that it was filed for purposes of delay. See Walsey v. American Fletcher Nat. Bank etc. Co., 151 Ga.App. 104, 258 S.E.2d 760. We therefore refuse to apply the sanction of Code Ann. § 6-1801. Lee v. Goldner, 135 Ga.App. 744, 219 S.E.2d Ju......
-
Curtis v. J. L. Todd Auction Co.
...388, 389, 280 S.E.2d 416. Accord, Hart v. Trust Co. of Columbus, 154 Ga.App. 329, 268 S.E.2d 384; Walsey v. American Fletcher Nat. Bank & Trust Co., 151 Ga.App. 104, 258 S.E.2d 760. Judgment SHULMAN, P. J., and SOGNIER, J., concur. ...