From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Associated Distributors v. McBee

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Nov 12, 1976
140 Ga. App. 433 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976)

Opinion

53033.

SUBMITTED NOVEMBER 1, 1976.

DECIDED NOVEMBER 12, 1976.

Action on account. Cobb State Court. Before Judge Robinson.

Hatcher, Meyerson, Oxford Irvin, Henry M. Hatcher, Jr., for appellant. Custer, Smith Manning, John R. Manning, for appellees.


Plaintiff appeals from the bench trial judgment in favor of defendant Northcutt below. The complaint sought to recover from two individuals who were the directors and officers of a corporation, Apple, Inc., for merchandise used by them in building houses on lots purchased in the name of the two defendants, McBee and Northcutt. McBee is not involved in this appeal because of his bankruptcy.

Plaintiff asserts error as to the judgment. Additionally, plaintiff contends that the trial court failed to consider two issues: (1) that the corporation was a "mere conduit" for the defendants' personal activities and that "to adhere to the doctrine of corporate entity would promote injustice and protect fraud"; and (2) that the defendants had used corporate assets while it was insolvent to obtain a preference for themselves.

In the findings of fact and conclusions of law the trial court noted plaintiff's "mere conduit" claim, but found that plaintiff knew of the corporation and its officers, carried the account in the corporate name and extended credit to Apple, Inc. on the personal guarantee of McBee alone. We held in Kingston Development Co. v. Kenerly, 132 Ga. App. 346 ( 208 S.E.2d 118) that under Code Ann. § 81A-152 (a) the appellate courts of this state will not interfere with the findings of a judge sitting without a jury where there is any evidence to support them. "We will not retry factual issues but limit our review to the correction of errors of law. [Cit.]" Campo Const., Inc. v. Stembridge, 138 Ga. App. 555, 557 ( 226 S.E.2d 797).

"Concomitant with this principle is the directive that `After judgment every presumption and inference favors it and the evidence must be construed to uphold rather than to destroy it. [Cit.]' Givens v. Gray, 126 Ga. App. 309, 310 ( 190 S.E.2d 607). Thus, in considering arguments concerning the fact findings we can not disturb the judge's findings and judgment absent some error of law. First National Bank of Atlanta v. Langford, 126 Ga. App. 325, 329 ( 190 S.E.2d 803)." Kingston Development Co. v. Kenerly, supra, p. 349.

Our review of the transcript and the findings shows that the trial court addressed all issues presented by the evidence adduced at trial and that this evidence was ample to support the court's findings. There are no errors of law or fact and the court did not err in entering judgment for the defendant. See Brook Forest Enterprises, Inc. v. Paulding County, 231 Ga. 695 (1) ( 203 S.E.2d 860); Doyal Development Co. v. Blair, 137 Ga. App. 434 ( 224 S.E.2d 55); Kingston Development Co. v. Kenerly, 132 Ga. App. 346, supra.

Judgment affirmed. Bell, C. J., and Stolz, J., concur.

SUBMITTED NOVEMBER 1, 1976 — DECIDED NOVEMBER 12, 1976.


Summaries of

Associated Distributors v. McBee

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Nov 12, 1976
140 Ga. App. 433 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976)
Case details for

Associated Distributors v. McBee

Case Details

Full title:ASSOCIATED DISTRIBUTORS, INC. v. McBEE et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Nov 12, 1976

Citations

140 Ga. App. 433 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976)
231 S.E.2d 449

Citing Cases

National General Ins. Co. v. Meeks

To avoid the odor of bad faith defendant should have by declaratory judgment sought a determination of…

C H Couriers v. American Mutual Insurance Co.

As to the principal amount, our review of the record evidence in this case supports the trial court's…