Legal Opinion

Dyal v. Dyal

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 14, 1939No. 12553PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Grice, Justice.

1. A pauper affidavit stating conjunctively tliat the plaintiff in error because of poverty is' unable to pay “the costs accrued and to accrue and necessary ordinarily to carry her said case to the Supreme Court” is insufficient to relieve the plaintiff in error from payment of costs in the Supreme Court. Hicks v. Hicks, 186 Ga. 362 (197 S. E. 878).

2. In a suit for divorce in a Florida court by a husband, in which lie asserted that he was a bona fide resident of that State and had been for the time required by its laws in order to give its court jurisdiction, where the wife…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Drake v. DrakeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
  2. Hall v. HallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
  3. Hicks v. HicksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Peeples v. NewmanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1952
  2. Ferster v. FersterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
  3. Barnett v. BarnettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  4. Lockman v. . LockmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  5. Marchman v. MarchmanSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945

13 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