Braden v. Martin
Supreme Court of Georgia
Processioning. 'Before Judge Maddox. Floyd superior court. April 18, 1910. G-. H. Braden made application to two of tlie processioners appointed in and for tlie 859th district, G. M., Floyd county, by the board of commissioners of roads and revenue, to procession his lands. Tim +wo processioners, with the county surveyor, proceeded to mark out the lines of his lánd, and, upon completion of their work, made their return to vthe ordinary of the county.
Read the full summary
Processioning. 'Before Judge Maddox. Floyd superior court. April 18, 1910. G-. H. Braden made application to two of tlie processioners appointed in and for tlie 859th district, G. M., Floyd county, by the board of commissioners of roads and revenue, to procession his lands. Tim +wo processioners, with the county surveyor, proceeded to mark out the lines of his lánd, and, upon completion of their work, made their return to vthe ordinary of the county. Attached to their return was a plat of the lands of Braden, made by the surveyor. Tt was stated in the return of the processioners that service…
1Opinion of the CourtBeck, J.
1. While the protest filed by the defendant in error to the return of the processioners contained several grounds, only two of them were passed upon by the court below, and the judgment of the court sustaining the protest was based upon those two grounds only: first, “that notice was not served upon protestant ten days before the alleged procession,” as required by law; second, upon the ground that the processioners had not been appointed by the ordinai-y of the county. The truth of both of these grounds was admitted in an agreed statement of facts. Held:
(а) Where the record did not contain a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Barnhill v. Georgia Trading & Development Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1924
- Hayes v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- Irby v. RaleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953