Barrett v. Union Banking Co.

137 S.E. 14, 163 Ga. 893, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 89
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 28, 1927
DocketNo. 5268
StatusPublished

This text of 137 S.E. 14 (Barrett v. Union Banking Co.) 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
Barrett v. Union Banking Co., 137 S.E. 14, 163 Ga. 893, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 89 (Ga. 1927).

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

Whenever it appears that the clerk of the trial court has failed to transmit to the Supreme Court, within the time prescribed by law, a bill of exceptions and transcript, and that an attorney for the plaintiff in error has been the cause of the delay, by consent, direc-, tion, or procurement of any kind, the writ of error will be dismissed. Civil Code, §§ 6185, 6186. Budden v. Brooks, 123 Ga. 882 (51 S. E. 727), and cit.; Wilson v. State, 124 Ga. 30 (52 S. E. 81) ; Wheeler v. Crawford, 135 Ga. 148 (69 S. E. 22); Moore v. State, 13 Ga. App. 32 (78 S. E. 774).

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Bill, J., absent for providential cause. E. W. Roberts, T. Elton Drake, and Stinchcomb & Glove, for plaintiffs in error. R. L. & H. C. Cox, contra.

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

Related

Budden v. Brooks
51 S.E. 727 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Wilson v. State
52 S.E. 81 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Wheeler v. Crawford
69 S.E. 22 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Moore v. State
78 S.E. 774 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 S.E. 14, 163 Ga. 893, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barrett-v-union-banking-co-ga-1927.