Smith v. Manley
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.
1. An assignment of error on the exclusion of documentary evidence which fails to set out in substance or by way of exhibit the document excluded, and which fails to state the objections to the admission of such evidence which were sustained by the court, is too vague and indefinite to present any question to this court. Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Jaques & Tinsley Co., 23 Ga. App. 396 (2) (98 S. E. 357); Harper v. Sutherland, 44 Ga. App. 594 (3) (162 S. E. 412). Accordingly, an assignment of error as follows cannot be considered here: "The objector as temporary guardian of Rita Smith tendered…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wilson v. PollardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Jaques & Tinsley Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
- Harper v. SutherlandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
3Cited by9 opinions
- Whiteley v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- Matthews v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2008
- Wood v. HamiltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
- Smith v. Goerlich's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- In the Interest of Q. J. A.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.