Legal Opinion
Reece v. McCormack
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided September 14, 1939No. 12950PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Duckworth, Justice.
The uncontradicted evidence shows that the verdict and judgment under attack in the present action were consented to by Iiowell Brooke, who at the time was an attorney employed by the defendant for the purpose of representing him in that case, without any limitation upon his authority. His act in consenting to a verdict and judgment was authorized by the defendant and was binding on him. Williams v. Simmons, 79 Ga. 649 (7 S. E. 133); Taylor v. American Freehold Land Mortgage Co., 106 Ga. 238 (3), 248 (32 S. E. 153); Hollenbeck v. Glover, 128 Ga. 52 (57 S. E. 108); Adkins v.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Williams v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Heath v. MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Bigham v. KistlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Davis v. First National BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
- Stone Mountain Confederate Monumental Ass'n v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Brumbelow v. Northern Propane Gas Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1983
- Morris M. Glazer v. J. C. Bradford and Company, a Partnership, J. C. Bradford and Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Vandiver v. McFarlandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
- Thompson v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Petty v. Complete Auto Transit, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1959
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.