Legal Opinion

Scarbrough v. Bell

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided November 12, 1941No. 13889PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

1. “Where by an order entered in term the hearing of a motion for a new trial is set for a particular day in vacation, that day, relatively to such motion, is, in legal contemplation, a continuation of the term at which the order was granted.” Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Railway Co. v. Strickland, 114 Ga. 998 (41 S. E. 501); Code of 1882, § 3719; Code of 1933, § 70-301; Ga. L. 1889, p. 83; Grady v. Hightower, 1 Ga. 252; Johnson v. Bemis, 4 Ga. 157; Herz v. Frank, 104 Ga. 638 (30 S. E. 797); Eady v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co., 129 Ga. 363 (58 S. E. 895).(a)…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Tompkins v. American Land Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  2. Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Railway Co. v. StricklandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  3. Willbanks v. UntrinerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1896
  4. Herz v. Frank & AdlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
  5. Nicholls v. PopwellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Fowler v. GrimesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
  2. Davis v. BuieSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
  3. Parker v. SpurlinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1971
  4. Lunsford v. HoweCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
  5. Cook v. BeutellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1946

1 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