Holland v. Chambers
Supreme Court of Georgia
Debt, from Carroll Superior Court. Tried before Judge Hammond, at October Term, 1856. This was an action by Edmund W. Holland, against Clayton Williams, principal, and John T. Chambers and Berrien Williams, securities, on a promissory note for $2,213 12, dated 8th July, 1851, and due the 4th of January thereafter. The Sheriff returned service on Chambers and Berrien Williams, and non est as to the principal, Clayton Williams.
Read the full summary
Debt, from Carroll Superior Court. Tried before Judge Hammond, at October Term, 1856. This was an action by Edmund W. Holland, against Clayton Williams, principal, and John T. Chambers and Berrien Williams, securities, on a promissory note for $2,213 12, dated 8th July, 1851, and due the 4th of January thereafter. The Sheriff returned service on Chambers and Berrien Williams, and non est as to the principal, Clayton Williams. The securities pleaded the general issue and usury. From the testimony, it appears that one Abel Harrison and Clayton Williams were copartners under the style of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
McDonald, J.
delivering the opinion.
The errors assigned in this case aré upon the refusal of the Court to grant a new trial. The record does not disclose, clearly, the rulings of the Court upon the several points raised by counsel, during the progress of the trial. The points themselves and the decision of the Court upon them, appear imperfectly, and by inference from the motion for the new trial. The Court granted the rule nisi, and his having granted it, is equivalent to a certificate on the part of the presiding Judge, that what transpired on the trial, so far as it is stated…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Charles A. Riley Co. v. W. T. Sears & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Lasater v. First National BankTexas Supreme Court · 1903
- Cheapstead v. FrankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884