Legal Opinion

Bateman v. City of Atlanta

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 26, 1935No. 24254PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMacIntyre, J.

1. “In the trial before a municipal court, the recorder, or other presiding judge, may take judicial notice of the ordinances of the city defining offenses against the same.”

2. “Neither the Supreme Court nor any other court than the municipal court can take judicial cognizance of a municipal ordinance.” Hill v. Atlanta, 125 Ga. 697 (54 S. E. 354, 5 Ann. Cas. 614).

3. The petition for certiorari assigns error upon the judgment of a municipal court, on the ground that it is contrary to the evidence. The existence of the ordinance alleged to have been violated is admitted in the petition; but the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hill v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Tipp v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
  2. Slaughter v. City of LagrangeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
  3. Lewenstein v. CurryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
  4. Lovell v. City of GriffinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
  5. Collier v. MerckCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2003

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API