Haygood v. Haygood
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
1. In the instant case the proceeding is not a statutory motion for a new trial, as provided for in the Code, § 70-301, or the equivalent of such a motion, such as a direct exception to a verdict and decree. Code, § 6-804; Lovelace v. Lovelace, 179 Ga. 822 (1-e), (177 S.E. 685). Consequently it was not demurrable on the ground that the petition failed to set forth a brief of the evidence submitted at the trial of the divorce suit, as is required in a motion for a new trial.
2. Neither is the proceeding a statutory motion to set aside a judgment, as provided in the Code, § 37-219, which…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Watts v. WattsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1936
- Lovelace v. LovelaceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Young v. YoungSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- McConnell v. McConnellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Musgrove v. MusgroveSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
- Gates v. GatesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Langston v. NashSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Frost v. FrostSupreme Court of Georgia · 1975
- Price v. PriceMississippi Supreme Court · 1947
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.