Roberts v. Bank of LaGrange
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint; from city court of LaGrange—B. J. Mayer, judge pro hac vice. September 3, 1918.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.
This case was tried in the. city court of La-Grange before a judge pro hac vice. Before the verdict was returned the regular judge of the court resumed the bench, and by agreement he received the verdict. The losing party (the plaintiff) in due time moved for a new trial. This motion was presented to the judge pro hac vice, who was within the bar of the court, while the regular judge was presiding in the trial of another case, and the rule nisi was then and there signed by the judge pro hac vice. When the motion for a new trial came on for a hearing the defendant filed a motion to dismiss it…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lascelles v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- King v. SearsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Chattanooga, Rome & Columbus Railroad v. OwenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1892
- Henderson v. PopeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1869
- Pendergrass v. DukeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Adams v. SeayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- Atlanta Coach Co. v. CobbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934