Spence v. Hilliard
Court of Appeals of Georgia
181 Ga. App. 767 (1987)
Mr. Spence (plaintiff), a landlord, was sued by his tenant. Spence engaged Hilliard and others (defendants) to defend the action and pursue a counterclaim that was compulsory. The defendants successfully defended the action but did not assert the counterclaim. Instead, the defendants filed the counterclaim as a claim against the tenant in a separate suit, which was dismissed because the claim should have been raised as a counterclaim. Spence then sued the defendants for malpractice, alleging that he had been damaged in the amount of $59,273.68. The trial court directed a verdict in favor of the defendants on the grounds that Spence had failed to demonstrate that he had suffered damages or that any judgment against the tenant would have been collectible. Spence appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (McMurray, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.