Legal Opinion
Truitt Co. v. Dunson & Bros.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided July 19, 1917No. 8455PublishedCited by 1 opinion
Money rule; from city court of LaGrange—Judge Harwell. December 13, 1916.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.
1. “A levying officer ruled for money, and who is manifestly a mere stakeholder with no interest in the result of the case, is • not a necessary party to a bill of exceptions sued out by one of the contestants for the fund.” DeVaughn v. Byrom, 110 Ga. 904 (36 S. E. 267).(o) This is true although the levying officer was a necessary party in the proceedings in the lower court. Quitman Oil Co. v. Peacock, 14 Ga. App. 550 (81 S. E. 908).(6) Under the above ruling the motion to dismiss the writ of error is denied.
2. Whenever an execution for State, county, or municipal taxes is paid by a person…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- National Bank v. DanforthSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Devaughn v. ByromSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Quitman Oil Co. v. PeacockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
- County of Laurens v. Citizens Bank of ValdostaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911
- Hill v. Georgia State Building & Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Dunson & Bros. v. Truitt Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1918