From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gordy v. Sumner

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 20, 1979
260 S.E.2d 384 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)

Opinion

57874.

ARGUED MAY 10, 1979.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 20, 1979.

Action for damages. Colquitt Superior Court. Before Judge Horkan.

Fred W. Rigdon, Jr., for appellants.

Larkin M. Fowler, Jr., James C. Whelchel, for appellees.


In this case before us by interlocutory review, the trial court granted appellants' motion to add appellee Robert L. Sumner as a party to their action, originally brought against Brady Sumner and Cecil Kimble. Although the permitted amendment to the complaint, with summons attached, was served upon appellee, there was no court order requiring appellee to file an answer. Contrary to appellants' contentions, it follows that appellee was never in default and that the court properly allowed appellee to appear and defend. Diaz v. First Nat. Bank, 144 Ga. App. 582 (2) ( 241 S.E.2d 467) (1978).

Judgment affirmed. Quillian, P. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.


ARGUED MAY 10, 1979 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 20, 1979.


Summaries of

Gordy v. Sumner

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 20, 1979
260 S.E.2d 384 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)
Case details for

Gordy v. Sumner

Case Details

Full title:GORDY et al. v. SUMNER et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 20, 1979

Citations

260 S.E.2d 384 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)
260 S.E.2d 384

Citing Cases

Random Access v. Atlanta Datacom

We agree. "Construing the pertinent provisions of OCGA §§ 9-11-7; 9-11-8; 9-11-12; 9-11-15, and 9-11-21 in…

Hamelberg v. National Ass'n of Government Employees

Consequently, NAGE was never in default, and it was not error for the trial court to deny Hamelberg's motion…