Legal Opinion

Cusic v. Holland Furnace Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 4, 1931No. 21597PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.

1. The bill of exceptions recites that “after argument the court passed an order overruling plaintiff’s petition for certiorari, and judgment was rendered accordingly.” Then follows this assignment of error: “To which order and judgment the plaintiff in certiorari excepted, now excepts, and assigns as error for the following reason: .That the order overruling plaintiff’s certiorari and the judgment thereon was contrary to law.” The assignment of error “is sufficient in form, and presents for review the questions of law made in the lower court by the *771petition for certiorari and the answer.”…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Meeks v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Hennessee v. JenningsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
  2. Hall v. Eufaula Brick Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
  3. Wood v. Fairfax Loan & Investment Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
  4. Scott v. UndercoflerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
  5. Scott v. UndercoflerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963

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

Powered by the Exa API