Legal Opinion

Holtzclaw v. Barrett

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided July 14, 1933No. 9565PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtHill, J.

1. The Civil Code (1910), § 4955, provides, with reference to attorneys at law: “They have authority to bind their clients in any action or proceeding, by any agreement in relation to the-eause, made in writing, and in signing judgments, entering appeals, and by an entry of such matters, when permissible, on the dockets of the court; but they can not take affidavits required of their clients, unless specially permitted by law.” Accordingly, a pauper affidavit filed by the plaintiff in error, and witnessed by a notary public who is the attorney representing the plaintiff in error, is void. See…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Nichols v. HamptonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1872
  2. Moultrie Lumber Co. v. JenkinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  3. Wilkowski v. HalleSupreme Court of Georgia · 1868

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Robinson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API