Tomlinson v. Cox
Supreme Court of Georgia
Motion for new trial, in Sumter Superior Court. Decided by Judge Warren, at November Term, 1849. When this motion came on to be heard, the claimant moved to dismiss the rule, on the ground that no brief of the testimony in this case was agreed on by counsel, and no approval of the Court was entered on the minutes of the Court, as was required by the 61st Rule of Court, and there was not any written evidence that a brief of the evidence had been filed with the Clerk.
Read the full summary
Motion for new trial, in Sumter Superior Court. Decided by Judge Warren, at November Term, 1849. When this motion came on to be heard, the claimant moved to dismiss the rule, on the ground that no brief of the testimony in this case was agreed on by counsel, and no approval of the Court was entered on the minutes of the Court, as was required by the 61st Rule of Court, and there was not any written evidence that a brief of the evidence had been filed with the Clerk. The Court overruled the motion, and ordered a brief of the evidence to be entered, nuncpro tunc, which the Court alleged he…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Lumpkin, J.
delivering the opinion.
[1.] In Graddy vs. Hightower, (1 Kelly’s R. 255,) this Court held, “ That nothing short of a brief of the testimony, approved by the Court, and such approval entered on the minutes, or agreed upon by the parties or their counsel, and such agreement entered on the minutes; at the term at which the rule for a new trial is applied for, will be a compliance with the 61st Rule of Court. This rule requires, that “ A brief of the testimony in the cause shall be filed by the party applying for such nexo trial, under the rexnsion and approval of the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Pease v. PeaseSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
- Warnell v. PonderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936