Odom v. Odom
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Head, Justice.
The motion to dissolve the receivership was based on allegations of fact. Neither the original motion to dissolve, nor the amendment, was verified by the petitioner. The motion to dissolve was not evidence of the facts alleged. The record clearly discloses that there was some hearing and consideration of the motion to dissolve the receivership. The bill of exceptions does not recite that the motion to dissolve was considered by the court on the pleadings alone. There is no evidence incorporated in the bill of exceptions on the hearing on the motion to dissolve, nor is any…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- McBurnette v. HuffSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Kennedy v. RogersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
- Register v. ColterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
- Vincent v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stout v. PateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
- Brown v. GoodloeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1960
- Chrysler Insurance v. DormineySupreme Court of Georgia · 1999