125 S.E.2d 511 (Ga.App. 1962), 39381, Kroger Co. v. Perpall

Citation: 125 S.E.2d 511, 105 Ga.App. 682

Opinion Judge: RUSSELL, Judge.

Party Name: The KROGER COMPANY v. J. J. PERPALL, Jr., et al.

Attorney: to the defect urged, the demurrer itself is too imperfect for consideration., The plaintiffs, Drs. Perpall and Woodford, filed an action for porperty damage in the Civil Court of Fulton County against The Kroger Co., alleging in substance that the plaintiff dentists maintained dental offices and ...

Judge Panel: CARLISLE, P. J., and EBERHARDT, J., concur.

Case Date: Tuesday April 03, 1962

Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

125 S.E.2d 511 (Ga.App. 1962), 39381, Kroger Co. v. Perpall

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

Georgia - 121 S.E. 689 (Ga.App. 1924), 14283, Douglas v. Prescott
Georgia - 196 S.E. 228 (Ga.App. 1938), 26535, Causey v. Swift & Co.
Georgia - 49 S.E. 780 (Ga. 1905), Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Bagley
Georgia - 82 S.E. 166 (Ga.App. 1914), 5538, Southwestern R. Co. v. Vellines
Georgia - 113 S.E.2d 228 (Ga.App. 1960), 38071, Cox v. Independent Life & Acc. Ins. Co.

See all quotations