Court Opinion

ID: 9567194
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 19:50:18.491378+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:00:22.942104
License: Public Domain

Bell, Chief Judge,
concurring in the judgment only. I have concurred in this judgment since it is clear that the action is barred by the statute of limitation. It is obvious that the statute ran at least from January 4,1969, while the suit was not filed until January 7, 1971. This is the only holding in Judge Deen’s opinion. I agree with that. However, I do consider his discussions of Parker v. Vaughan, 124 Ga. App. 300 (183 SE2d 605) and Everhart v. Rich’s Inc., 229 Ga. 798 (194 SE2d 425) to be obiter dictum.
As the writer of Parker v. Vaughan, where the statute of limitation was first extended, I feel it my duty to warn against indiscriminate extensions of the statute. I sincerely hope that Parker v. Vaughan will not prove to be a stepping stone from which our appellate courts will destroy the very necessary and beneficial effects of the statute of limitation.