Legal Opinion

Peavy v. Atkinson Bros.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 21, 1899PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Practice in the Supreme Court.

1Opinion of the CourtFish, J.

The above headnote needs no elaboration. Under repeated rulings of this court, the assignment of error in the bill of exceptions in this case is too general to be considered by the court. It does not specify how or wherein the trial judge, to whom the case was submitted without the intervention of a jurj»-, erred in the judgment rendered. It is incumbent on a plaintiff in error to specify plainly and distinctly the decision complained of, and the error alleged to exist therein ; and unless this is done the case can not be considered by this court. Mayor of Brunswick v. Moore, 74 Ga. 409; Hall…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. AndersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
  2. Mutual Building & Loan Ass'n v. GlessnerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  3. Mayor of Brunswick v. MooreSupreme Court of Georgia · 1885

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Eastmore v. BunkleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  2. Marshall v. English-American Loan & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  3. Collins v. CarrSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
  4. Smith v. MarshallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
  5. Charleston & Western Carolina Railway Co. v. Cottonseed Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1918

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

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

Powered by the Exa API