Norwood v. Peeples
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Dissent
Gilbert, J.,
dissenting. 1. The majority of the court, in the third lieadnote, hold that the petition addressed to the ordinary “was not such a contest of the election as is provided and required” under the law. Only one defect in the petition addressed to the ordinary is pointed out, to wit: in the second headnote it is pointed out that the Civil Code (1910), §121 (2), requires five days’ notice in writing to the contestee of the time' and place where the contestant intends to take testimony and the judicial officer before whom the testimony will be taken. The contestee makes no complaint of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Richmond County v. SteedSupreme Court of Georgia · 1920
- People Ex Rel. Keene v. Board of SupervisorsNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Harris v. SheffieldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Tupper v. DartSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- French v. JonesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.