Legal Opinion

Fordham v. Ehrlich & Brother

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 29, 1903Published

Attachment and claim. Before Judge Bower. ' City court of Bainbridge. September 9, 1902.

1Opinion of the CourtFish, J.

1. On the call of this case, counsel for the defendants in error made a motion to dismiss the same, on the ground that this court was without jurisdiction to review, by direct writ of error, any judgment rendered by the city court of Bainbridge. The question of jurisdiction raised by this motion requires no discussion, since it has heretofore been definitely settled, adversely to the movants, by prior decisions of this court. See Alabama Midland Ry. Co. v. Swindell, 117 Ga. 883, and cases cited.

2; The controlling question presented by the bill of exceptions sued out in this case is whether or…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Haslett v. RodgersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
  2. Alabama Midland Railway Co. v. Swindell & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  3. Gray v. NeillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
  4. First National Bank v. RaganSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893

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

Powered by the Exa API