Baldwin v. McCrea

Supreme Court of Georgia

Baldwin v. McCrea

38 Ga. 650

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 15, 1869

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 38 Ga. 650 (Baldwin v. McCrea) 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

Baldwin v. McCrea, 38 Ga. 650 (Ga. 1869).

Pincite

Opinion

Brown, C. J.

We see no cause for complaint at the decision of this case, in 37 Ga. R., 48. That ruling is sustained by Mitchell vs. Printup, 25 Ga. R., 182, and by Beard vs. Simmons, 9 Ga. R., 4. The other application for new trial, in this case, was made upon the identical ground set forth in this application, and was overruled by this Court. A party can not avoid the effect of a solemn adjudication of his rights in a Court of competent jurisdiction, by a change of forum, from the equity to the law side of the Court. The maxim “ res judicatae pro veritate accipiuntur,” is applicable.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Brown, C. J.

We see no cause for complaint at the decision of this case, in 37 Ga. R., 48. That ruling is sustained by Mitchell vs. Printup, 25 Ga. R., 182, and by Beard vs. Simmons, 9 Ga. R., 4. The other application for new trial, in this case, was made upon the identical ground set forth in this application, and was overruled by this Court. A party can not avoid the effect of a solemn adjudication of his rights in a Court of competent jurisdiction, by a change of forum, from the equity to the law side of the Court. The maxim “ res judicatae pro veritate accipiuntur,” is applicable.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 Ga. 650, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baldwin-v-mccrea-ga-1869.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack