Legal Opinion

Aiken v. Richardson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 4, 1951No. 33567, 33568PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) Proceedings on money rules are controlled by chapter 24-2 of the Code of Georgia, providing that a judge of the superior court, upon application, may grant a rule nisi containing a full statement of the case in which the -officer is called upon to show cause; *184that in answer to- this rule the officer ruled shall fully respond in writing and under oath; that thereafter the movant of the rule may traverse the truth of such answer and, when such traverse is filed, an issue is joined which shall be tried before a jury. Rules against officers of the court for…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Read Phosphate Co. v. Weichselbaum Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  2. Reynolds v. HowardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  3. Hixon v. CallawayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  4. Parker v. HarlingSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  5. Aiken v. RichardsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Dowis v. McCurdyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  2. Aiken v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
  3. Able v. Consolidated Loan & Finance Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  4. Aiken v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1954
  5. Dowis v. McCurdyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API