Albany Hardware & Mill Supply Co. v. Haire

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Albany Hardware & Mill Supply Co. v. Haire

117 S.E. 771, 30 Ga. App. 261, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 381

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 15, 1923

Docket14333

StatusPublished

This text of 117 S.E. 771 (Albany Hardware & Mill Supply Co. v. Haire) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albany Hardware & Mill Supply Co. v. Haire, 117 S.E. 771, 30 Ga. App. 261, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 381 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The Civil Code (1910), § 6167, provides that “ within 10 days after, the bill of exceptions is signed and certified, the party plaintiff: therein shall serve a copy thereof upon the opposite party or his attorney, and if there be several parties with different attorneys, upon éach, with a return of such service (or acknowledgment of service) endorsed upon or annexed to such bill of exceptions; and they alone are parties defendant in the Supreme Court who are thus served.” In the ease here for review the bill of exceptions was certified on January 3, 1923, and service was entered thereon as follows: “ Served the defendant, S. W. Haire, in person with a copy of the within. This the 9th day of February, 1923, A. J. Denson, Deputy-Sheriff.” It affirmatively appearing that the bill of exceptions was not served within the time provided by law, the writ of error must be and is dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Luke, J.

The Civil Code (1910), § 6167, provides that “ within 10 days after, the bill of exceptions is signed and certified, the party plaintiff: therein shall serve a copy thereof upon the opposite party or his attorney, and if there be several parties with different attorneys, upon éach, with a return of such service (or acknowledgment of service) endorsed upon or annexed to such bill of exceptions; and they alone are parties defendant in the Supreme Court who are thus served.” In the ease here for review the bill of exceptions was certified on January 3, 1923, and service was entered thereon as follows: “ Served the defendant, S. W. Haire, in person with a copy of the within. This the 9th day of February, 1923, A. J. Denson, Deputy-Sheriff.” It affirmatively appearing that the bill of exceptions was not served within the time provided by law, the writ of error must be and is dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

117 S.E. 771, 30 Ga. App. 261, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 381, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albany-hardware-mill-supply-co-v-haire-gactapp-1923.