Bassett v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia

Bassett v. Smith

172 S.E.2d 407, 226 Ga. 10, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 408

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 8, 1970

Docket25518

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 172 S.E.2d 407 (Bassett v. Smith) 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

Bassett v. Smith, 172 S.E.2d 407, 226 Ga. 10, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 408 (Ga. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Justice.

Rule 16 (3) of this court (Code Ann. § 24-4516 (3), 221 Ga. 884) provides as follows: “The brief of the appellant shall consist of two parts: ... (3) Part one shall contain a statement of each error enumerated. It shall also contain succinct and accurate statements of the issues of law as made by the errors enumerated and shall refer to farts of the record and transcrift of the evidence relied ufon in suffort thereof. Any enumeration of error not thus dealt with will be disregarded.” (Emphasis supplied).

The judgment of the trial court denying the writ of habeas corpus must be affirmed since the appellant's brief failed to contain references to the record showing the errors specified or the references necessary for a consideration thereof. Hicks v. Maple Valley Corp., 223 Ga. 577 (156 SE2d 904); Wallis v. Maddox, 223 Ga. 626 (157 SE2d 456); Estes v. Perkins, 225 Ga. 268 (2) (167 SE2d 588).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Felton, Justice.

Rule 16 (3) of this court (Code Ann. § 24-4516 (3), 221 Ga. 884) provides as follows: “The brief of the appellant shall consist of two parts: ... (3) Part one shall contain a statement of each error enumerated. It shall also contain succinct and accurate statements of the issues of law as made by the errors enumerated and shall refer to farts of the record and transcrift of the evidence relied ufon in suffort thereof. Any enumeration of error not thus dealt with will be disregarded.” (Emphasis supplied).

The judgment of the trial court denying the writ of habeas corpus must be affirmed since the appellant's brief failed to contain references to the record showing the errors specified or the references necessary for a consideration thereof. Hicks v. Maple Valley Corp., 223 Ga. 577 (156 SE2d 904); Wallis v. Maddox, 223 Ga. 626 (157 SE2d 456); Estes v. Perkins, 225 Ga. 268 (2) (167 SE2d 588).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 S.E.2d 407, 226 Ga. 10, 1970 Ga. LEXIS 408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bassett-v-smith-ga-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack