Legal Opinion

Holt v. Edmondson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided August 15, 1860PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Motion to enter an Appeal, in Whitfield Superior Court. Decision by Judge Walker, at the April Term, i860. An action was brought in Whitfield Superior Court, in the name of the Central Bank of Georgia, for the use of James Edmondson, against Robert A. Holt, as endorser on a note, payable at the Central Bank, and negotiated in the same. The case was tried at the October Term, 1859, and a verdict rendered in favor of the defendant.

Read the full summary

Motion to enter an Appeal, in Whitfield Superior Court. Decision by Judge Walker, at the April Term, i860. An action was brought in Whitfield Superior Court, in the name of the Central Bank of Georgia, for the use of James Edmondson, against Robert A. Holt, as endorser on a note, payable at the Central Bank, and negotiated in the same. The case was tried at the October Term, 1859, and a verdict rendered in favor of the defendant. During the same term, and immediately after the rendition of the verdict, James Edmondson, for whose sole use and benefit the action was brought and prosecuted, went…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court. —

Lyon, J.,

delivering the opinion.

The appeal was properly allowed. The party against whom the verdict and judgment was rendered, went into the-clerk’s office, paid the costs, tendered sufficient security, and demanded an appeal during the same term. This was all the law required of him, and that the appeal was not entered from the neglect of the clerk, is not to. prejudice the right of the party entitled to the appeal. This was in *359accordance with the rule prescribed by this Court in Short vs. Cohen, 11 Geo. 39, and has been steadily adhered to since. Then, when a party, in good…

2Cited by8 opinions

  1. Continental Building & Loan Ass'n v. MillsNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
  2. Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad v. GammageSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
  3. Robison v. MedlockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1877
  4. Jackson v. HaislySupreme Court of Florida · 1891
  5. In re Local Improvement Districts Numbers 29 to 37Washington Supreme Court · 1919

3 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