Legal Opinion

Majette v. Strickland

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided July 11, 1923No. 14208PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

1. “ The defendant in error moved to dismiss the bill of exceptions, because pervice was not made or acknowledged within ten days of the signing of the same. The motion is denied as not being well taken. Ga. L. 1911, p. 149 (Park’s Ann. Code, § 6164 (a)); Stewart v. Randall, 138 Ga. 796 (76 S. E. 352); Jones v. Patterson, 138 Ga. 862 (76 S. E. 378); Cook v. Parsons, 143 Ga. 127 (84 S. E. 559); Mitchell Automobile Co. v. McDaniel, 143 Ga. 516 (85 S. E. 635); Langford v. Salter, 146 Ga. 123 (90 S. E. 860).” Scott v. Davis, 22 Ga. App. 32 (1) (95 S. E. 332). The ruling quoted above is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Stewart Bros. v. Randall Bros.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  2. Jones v. PattersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  3. Mitchell Automobile Co. v. McDanielSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  4. Scott v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918
  5. Langford v. SalterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hall v. Eufaula Brick Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API