Summary
In Banks v. Harden, 220 Ga. 266 (138 S.E.2d 320), this court held that the petition was subject to general demurrer because it was devoid of allegations showing the value of the property so as to enable the court to determine that the contract sought to be enforced was fair, just, and equitable, and one that in good conscience should be performed. Before the remittitur of this court was made the judgment of the trial court, the petitioner amended to meet the deficiency pointed out by this court.
Summary of this case from Banks v. HardenOpinion
22625.
ARGUED SEPTEMBER 15, 1964.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 28, 1964.
Specific performance. Banks Superior Court. Before Judge Russell.
Wheeler, Robinson Thompson, B. Carl Buice, for plaintiffs in error.
Davis Davidson, Jack S. Davidson, Kimzey Kimzey, Herbert B. Kimzey, contra.
The petition for specific performance in the present case is entirely devoid of any allegations showing the value of the property so as to enable the court to determine that the contract sought to be enforced was fair, just, and equitable, and one that in good conscience should be performed, and the trial judge erred in overruling the general demurrers of the defendants. Coleman v. Woodland Hills Co., 196 Ga. 626 ( 27 S.E.2d 226); Ogletree v. Ingram LeGrand Lumber Co., 207 Ga. 333 (3) ( 69 S.E.2d 480); Almand v. Williams, 208 Ga. 703 ( 69 S.E.2d 271); Ewing v. Paulk, 208 Ga. 722 (2) ( 69 S.E.2d 268); Morgan v. Mitchell, 209 Ga. 348 (2) ( 72 S.E.2d 310); Sikes v. Sims, 212 Ga. 391 (7) ( 93 S.E.2d 6); Seven Fifty, Inc. v. Hunter, 216 Ga. 407 ( 116 S.E.2d 552); Howington v. Juhan, 218 Ga. 748 ( 130 S.E.2d 822). Since the petition should have been dismissed on general demurrer, the other questions made by the record are moot.
Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur.