Legal Opinion

Pike v. Sutton

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 9, 1902PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Certiorari. Before Judge Harris. Coweta. superior court. November 6, 1901.

1Opinion of the CourtSimmons, C. J.

1. A clerk in a retail store, whose duties are such as to keep him employed one half of his time in “ drudgery and hard work,” one fourth of his time “ in waiting on customers in the sale of goods, and one fourth waiting for customer,” is a laborer within the meaning of the laws of this State exempting from garnishment the wages of laborers. Oliver v. Macon. Hardware Co., 98 Ga. 249; Stuart v. Poole, 112 Ga. 818.

2. The court below was right in sustaining the certiorari, but, instead of rendering a final judgment, should have ordered a new trial in the magistrate’s court. See Holmes v. Pye,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Oliver v. Macon Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  2. Holmes v. Pye & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  3. Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. AustinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  4. Stuart v. PooleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Howell v. AtkinsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  2. Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. J. M. High Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
  3. Bryan v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  4. Stothart v. MeltonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903

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

Powered by the Exa API