Ex parte motion by Rust
Supreme Court of Georgia
Repealing Statutes. Jury. Before Judge Strozier. Dougherty Superior Court. December, 1870. Under the Act of the 10th of October, 1868, certain members of certain fire companies are exempted from jury duty. The commissioners, in selecting persons for jury duty in Baker, county, put the names of sixty members of one of these companies in one envelope in the jury box, but not on the jury list. Some of them, being put upon the traverse jury, claimed exemption under said Act.
Read the full summary
Repealing Statutes. Jury. Before Judge Strozier. Dougherty Superior Court. December, 1870. Under the Act of the 10th of October, 1868, certain members of certain fire companies are exempted from jury duty. The commissioners, in selecting persons for jury duty in Baker, county, put the names of sixty members of one of these companies in one envelope in the jury box, but not on the jury list. Some of them, being put upon the traverse jury, claimed exemption under said Act. The Court refused to discharge them, bolding that the general jury Act of 1869 repealed this special exemption. This is…
1Opinion of the Court
Lochrane, Chief Justice.
The question presented by this record is one of great practical importance, and has invoked at our hands the consideration to which it is entitled. The question presented is the exemption of parties from jury duty, by virtue of their con*210nection with a fire company, in the city of Albany. The Court below held that they were liable; from which ruling the case now comes before the Court. It is admitted that under the Act of organization, the members are active working members of the Throneteeska Fire Company, of the city of Albany, and otherwise, within the terms of the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Dunlap v. StateSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
- State v. CantwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- State v. . CantwellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906