Bank of Ringgold v. Poarch
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtLuke, J.
1. Under sections 6139, 6224, and 6332 of the Civil Code (1910), “a paper purporting to be a bill of exceptions, properly certified by the trial judge, but not signed by the plaintiff in error, or his counsel, is not a legal bill of exceptions and cannot be amended in the Supreme Court by attaching the counsel’s name thereto.” Lott v. Waycross, 152 Ga. 237 (110 S. E. 217), and cases cited.(a) “Words traced with a pen, or stamped, printed, or made legible by any other device whereby such act is for the purpose of putting down a man’s name at the end of an instrument to attest its validity, and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hewel v. HoginCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Cummings v. LandesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1908
- Lott v. City of WaycrossSupreme Court of Georgia · 1921
- B. F. Bridges & Son v. First National Bank of CenterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1907
3Cited by9 opinions
- Davis v. Harpagon Co., LLCSupreme Court of Georgia · 2006
- Burgess v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1950
- Katz v. TeicherCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1959
- George Carlton Davis, III v. Jim Holley Daniels, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2016
- Ganns v. WorrellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.