Whitehurst v. Singletary
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtSutton, C. J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) This action was ex parte in the court of ordinary. On appeal to the superior court, the ordinary was named as appellee, although this was neither proper nor necessary, for, as ordinary, he could not be affected in any way by the outcome of the litigation. On exception to this court the ordinary was named as the defendant in error and served with the bill of exceptions, but he made no appearance in this court, and will not be affected by the judgment of this court, and therefore cannot be considered either as a proper or necessary party. The proceeding was…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Chapin v. CummingsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Swain v. StewartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
- Clements v. FletcherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Edwards v. AddisonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
- Davidson v. StorySupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Lee v. CoffieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Estate of Baldwin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1973
- Cromer v. ChambersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Estate of Baldwin v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1973