Bell v. Atlanta Telephone & Telegraph Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Affidavit of illegality; from municipal court of Atlanta. April 19, 1914.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, J.
1. A second affidavit of illegality is not maintainable if based on the same facts that the first affidavit was based upon. The fact that the first affidavit was dismissed, without a trial of the issues raised or attempted to be raised by it, does not make an exception to the rule. Civil Code, § 6288; Hurt v. Mason, 2 Ga. 367; Leonard v. Collier, 53 Ga. 388 (3) ; Burnett v. Fouche, 77 Ga. 550; Fuller v. Vining, 87 Ga. 600 (13 S. E. 635) ; Baker v. Smith, 91 Ga. 143 (16 S. E. 967) ; Binder v. Ragsdale, 100 Ga. 400 (28 S. E. 165); Cone Export &c. Co. v. McCalla, 113 Ga. 17 (38 S. E. 336).
2.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Baker v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Binder v. RagsdaleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Burnett v. FoucheSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886
- Cone Export & Commission Co. v. McCallaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Fuller & Oglesby v. ViningSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Anderson v. Georgia State BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
- Elders v. BeasleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1928
- Bell v. TysonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951