Court Opinion

ID: 9851678
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-24 05:17:40.04804+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:22:12.364879
License: Public Domain

*439On Rehearing.
On rehearing, counsel for the movant cite Summerour v. Medlin, 48 Ga. App. 403 (172 S. E. 836), in support of the contention that a nonsuit should have been granted, it being argued that the fact that the defendant was in default removes these cases from the rule stated in this opinion. Examination of the Summerour case shows that the majority opinion there was predicated on the fact that the plaintiff did not prove his case as laid, in that he failed to prove a conspiracy between the only defendant upon whom service was had and another person whose primary obligation it was to pay the plaintiff a certain liquidated sum on a contract. The dissenting opinion there is to the effect that a nonsuit should not be granted where a defendant is in default, as such default admits all the allegations of the petition which are properly pleaded. Thus, both the majority and minority opinions of the Summerour case support the decision reached here; however, this decision goes only to the extent of holding that the plaintiff proved his case as laid, without considering whether or not the defendant’s default would have relieved him from making such proof.