Ansley v. Davidson & Co.

34 S.E. 611, 110 Ga. 279, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 552
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 30, 1899·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

Lumpkin, P. J.

There was no brief of the evidence in this case, nor bona fide attempt to make one. The document purporting to be such was a detailed report of the trial, including, without even the appearance of necessity, all manner of useless and irrelevant matter. Accordingly, this court will not review the evidence; and as no question is presented by the bill of exceptions which can be intelligently considered and passed upon without reference to the evidence, the judgment below must be affirmed. Southern Mining Company v. Brown, 107 Ga. 264; Price v. High cG Co., 108 Ga. 145, and cases therein cited. If any error was committed at the trial below, the plaintiff in error has not, as it was incumbent upon him to do, affirmatively, and in the manner prescribed by law, so shown to this court.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Ansley v. Davidson & Co., 34 S.E. 611, 110 Ga. 279, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 552 (Ga. 1899).

34 S.E. 611 (Ansley v. Davidson & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tom Hewitt Auto Auction Co. v. Vickers
137 S.E.2d 403 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1964)
Boston Insurance Co. v. Harmon
18 S.E.2d 84 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Jones v. Gate City Lodge No. 54
156 S.E. 672 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Roberts v. City of Cairo
66 S.E. 938 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1909)
Rucker v. Tabor & Almand
57 S.E. 967 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
McGregor v. Third National Bank of Atlanta
53 S.E. 93 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Wall v. Mercer
46 S.E. 420 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Fleming v. Roberts
40 S.E. 792 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Moore, Marsh & Co. v. Medlock
38 S.E. 825 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)