Legal Opinion

Carl S. Strickland Co. v. Union Banking Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 14, 1931No. 20717PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.

1. The trial judge was not disqualified because he and a stockholder of the plaintiff corporation were married to sisters. Lee v. Jones, 161 Ga. 829 (132 S. E. 79) ; Central R. Co. v. Roberts, 91 Ga. 513 (18 S. E. 315).

2. While the judge was related by affinity to a nephew of his wife (James v. Douglasville Banking Co., 26 Ga. App. 509, 106 S. E. 595), the fact that this nephew appeared as attorney for the plaintiff did not serve to disqualify the judge, it not appearing that such attorney was employed on a contingent basis or had any other than a professional interest in the litigation.…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. RobertsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
  2. McDaniel v. Mallary Bros. Machinery Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
  3. Morris v. Georgia Loan, Savings & Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  4. Guaranty Investment & Loan Co. v. Athens Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1922
  5. Town of Douglasville v. MobleySupreme Court of Georgia · 1929

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. State v. HooperSupreme Court of Kansas · 1934
  2. Bank of Jonesboro v. CarnesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  3. Georgia Railroad Bank & Trust Co. v. Liberty National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1934
  4. Archibald Hardware Co. v. GiffordCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  5. Monk v. HoldenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938

2 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