Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Amos v. Parker

Amos v. Parker

16 S.E. 200, 88 Ga. 754, 1892 Ga. LEXIS 96
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 5, 1892
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 16 S.E. 200 (Amos v. Parker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amos v. Parker, 16 S.E. 200, 88 Ga. 754, 1892 Ga. LEXIS 96 (Ga. 1892).

Opinion

Bleckley, Chief Justice.

The statutory provisions applicable to this case are found in the code, §§2384-2393 inclusive. To ascertain and fix new lines is not within the power or functions of processioners. Their vocation is to run and mark lines which at some previous time were located and established. They seek and find lines already existing, but cannot bring into existence any which have not been before designated on the surface of the earth. Lines merely drawn on paper or in the minds of contracting parties, are not ready for the search or services of processioners. Moreover, any one dissatisfied with their work cannot protest against it and make that protest [756]*756a ground for returning the papers to tlie superior court and there having a trial, until a line has been actually run and marked. This is necessary to give the superior court jurisdiction over the subject-matter, and cannot be dispensed with by the consent of the parties. The line “as run and marked” is the subject-matter to which any litigation under the protest must relate, and when there is no such subject-matter, there is no jurisdiction. For this reason the court correctly refused to grant a new trial, and nothing remains but to dismiss the whole proceeding, and direction is given that this be done.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Boatright v. Tyre
144 S.E.2d 471 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Goodson v. Pope
143 S.E.2d 779 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Henry v. Crabtree
110 S.E.2d 88 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)
Dally v. Arnold
85 S.E.2d 808 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)
Hackle v. Bowen
81 S.E.2d 294 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Davis v. Stone
77 S.E.2d 775 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Milligan v. Hale
76 S.E.2d 29 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Russell v. Radford
45 S.E.2d 705 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Rogers v. Beavers
45 S.E.2d 74 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Hall v. Browning
32 S.E.2d 126 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Smith v. Clemons
31 S.E.2d 621 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1944)
Veal v. Barber
30 S.E.2d 252 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Byrd v. McLucas
20 S.E.2d 597 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Pearre v. Wilkinson
183 S.E. 626 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Reynolds v. Kinsey
178 S.E. 200 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Standard Oil Co. v. Altman
161 S.E. 353 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Mattox v. DeLoach
123 S.E. 624 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
McAlpin v. Thompson
116 S.E. 64 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Tucker v. Roberts
108 S.E. 222 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1921)
Elkins v. Merritt
20 Ga. App. 737 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 S.E. 200, 88 Ga. 754, 1892 Ga. LEXIS 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amos-v-parker-ga-1892.