Watkins Chappell & Co. v. Smith
Supreme Court of Georgia
Complaint, in Randolph Superior Court. Decision by Judge Perkins, October Term, 1854. Watkins Chappell & Co. obtained a verdict against Seaborn A. Smith. Smith entered an appeal. The clerk, in making out the appeal, misnamed the plaintiffs — writing their names “ William Chappell & Co.” Plaintiffs’ Counsel moved to dismiss the appeal on that ground.
Read the full summary
Complaint, in Randolph Superior Court. Decision by Judge Perkins, October Term, 1854. Watkins Chappell & Co. obtained a verdict against Seaborn A. Smith. Smith entered an appeal. The clerk, in making out the appeal, misnamed the plaintiffs — writing their names “ William Chappell & Co.” Plaintiffs’ Counsel moved to dismiss the appeal on that ground. The Court refused the motion, and allowed the appeal to be amended,although the surety on appeal was dead and unrepresented before the Court. This decision is assigned as error. Defendant relied on a receipt, in full, from William Taylor,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Benning J.,
delivering the opinion.
[1.] The misnomer in the appeal, was amendable by the Act of 1850, to authorize “ amendments to be made instanter, in all judicial proceedings, and for other purposes.” The first section of that Act is in the following words: “ That from after the passage of this Act, all misnomers made in writs, petitions, bills or other judicial proceedings, on the civil side of the Court, shall be amended and corrected instanter, without working any unnecessary delay to the party having made the same.” (Cobb’s Dig. 493.)
An appeal is a’“judicial proceeding.”
Inde…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Head v. Marietta Guano Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1906
- Parker v. WellonsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Penn Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- Philman v. MarshallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897