Watson v. Bishop
Supreme Court of Georgia
Amendment. Processioning. Before Judge LaWSON. Greene Superior Court. March Term, 1882. The processioners of the 145th district G. M., of Greene county, together with the county surveyor, were called in to settle a disputed line between Watson on one side and Bishop and Thompson on the other, upon the application of Watson. The disputed line only was laid off, with its course and distance.
Read the full summary
Amendment. Processioning. Before Judge LaWSON. Greene Superior Court. March Term, 1882. The processioners of the 145th district G. M., of Greene county, together with the county surveyor, were called in to settle a disputed line between Watson on one side and Bishop and Thompson on the other, upon the application of Watson. The disputed line only was laid off, with its course and distance. Bishop and Thompson filed a protest, alleging that the line as run was not the true line, but another, which was described in the protest. The case was returned to the superior court. ' When it was called…
1Opinion of the Court
Crawford, Justice.
The questions presented in this case for the judgment of the court, are:
(1.) Whether the return made by processioners, which sho.ws upon its face that they did not have a survey made of the entire tract of land of the applicant, is such a compliance with the law for processioning as to give the applicant any of those rights to which he would be entitled if legally done.
(2.) Whether after a protest by adjoining owners has been filed, in which the aforesaid fact is not set up as a ground of objection, the same may be amended by inserting it therein, and claiming all the…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Rattaree v. MorrowSupreme Court of Georgia · 1884
- Earney v. OwenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
- Martin v. CauthenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886
- Ogletree v. CathrallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
- Irby v. RaleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.