Bater v. Bater

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Bater v. Bater

58 S.E. 312, 2 Ga. App. 62, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 272

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 24, 1907

Docket302

StatusPublished

This text of 58 S.E. 312 (Bater v. Bater) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bater v. Bater, 58 S.E. 312, 2 Ga. App. 62, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 272 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

This case was brought to this court by writ of error, and, when called in its order, there was no appearance for the plaintiff in error. -The defendant in error moved the court to open the record, and asked for an affirmance of the judgment, and damages for delay, under the Civil Code, §5594. In compliance with this motion, the record was opened and the case considered. There is no merit whatever in the exceptions of the plaintiff in error, and this fact,-taken in con[63]*63nection with his failure to appear and prosecute, shows that he must, have brought the case here for delay only. It is ordered that the judgment be affirmed, and that ten per cent, on the amount of the judgment in the court below be awarded against the plaintiff in error in favor of the defendant in error, as damages for bringing the case here for delay only. Craton v. Hackney, 91 Ga. 192, 17 S. E. 124; Avera v. Vason, 42 Ga. 234.

'Motion for damages for bringing up case for delay.

.Submitted May 1, Decided May 24, 1907. Robert L. Colding, Tomlinson Fort, for movant.

Judgment affirmed, with damages.

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

Hill, C. J.

This case was brought to this court by writ of error, and, when called in its order, there was no appearance for the plaintiff in error. -The defendant in error moved the court to open the record, and asked for an affirmance of the judgment, and damages for delay, under the Civil Code, §5594. In compliance with this motion, the record was opened and the case considered. There is no merit whatever in the exceptions of the plaintiff in error, and this fact,-taken in con[63]*63nection with his failure to appear and prosecute, shows that he must, have brought the case here for delay only. It is ordered that the judgment be affirmed, and that ten per cent, on the amount of the judgment in the court below be awarded against the plaintiff in error in favor of the defendant in error, as damages for bringing the case here for delay only. Craton v. Hackney, 91 Ga. 192, 17 S. E. 124; Avera v. Vason, 42 Ga. 234.

'Motion for damages for bringing up case for delay.

.Submitted May 1, Decided May 24, 1907. Robert L. Colding, Tomlinson Fort, for movant.

Judgment affirmed, with damages.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 S.E. 312, 2 Ga. App. 62, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 272, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bater-v-bater-gactapp-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack