Healey, Berry & Co. v. Scofield
Supreme Court of Georgia
Claim. Practice in the Supreme Court. Principal and surety. Before Judge Hillyer. Fulton Superior Court. October Term, 1877. A fi.fa. was issued by the comptroller general against Blodgett, and his securities, as superintendent of the Western and Atlantic Railroad, and levied on certain property as belonging to H. I. Kimball, one of the securities.
Read the full summary
Claim. Practice in the Supreme Court. Principal and surety. Before Judge Hillyer. Fulton Superior Court. October Term, 1877. A fi.fa. was issued by the comptroller general against Blodgett, and his securities, as superintendent of the Western and Atlantic Railroad, and levied on certain property as belonging to H. I. Kimball, one of the securities. It was claimed by Healey, Berry & Co.; on the trial it was found subject; they made a motion for new trial, which was overruled, and they excepted. The only point made by claimants which is necessary to an understanding of the decision is this:…
1Opinion of the Court
Jackson, Judge.
A motion was made to dismiss this case on the ground that a party, not a party to the case tried by the jury, made the motion for a new trial, and brought the judgment of the court refusing to grant it to this court. Of course nobody but a party to the case tried can move to set aside the verdict, for the simple reason that the real party may be satisfied with the verdict, and may not wish to open the case anew. A stranger has no right to meddle with it, and hence, where one corporation was the party which tried the cause before the jury, and another corporation made a motion…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Jackson v. StanfordSupreme Court of Georgia · 1855
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dismuke v. TrammellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
- Baker v. MiddlebrooksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888