Blaylock v. Kistner

155 S.E. 536, 42 Ga. App. 165, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 273
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedOctober 7, 1930
Docket20600
StatusPublished

This text of 155 S.E. 536 (Blaylock v. Kistner) 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
Blaylock v. Kistner, 155 S.E. 536, 42 Ga. App. 165, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 273 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

Under all the facts of the case as disclosed by the record, the court’s judgment upon the written motion to dismiss the case was not error for any reason assigned. See, in this connection, Park’s Code, § 5390; Dean v. Donalson, 2 Ga. App. 462 (58 S. E. 679) ; Jones v. Eubanks, 86 Ga. 616 (12 S. E. 1065).

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Mann & Field, W. F. Mann, for plaintiff in error. Maddox, Sapp & Maddox, contra.

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

Related

Jones v. Eubanks
12 S.E. 1065 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1891)
Dean v. Donalson
58 S.E. 679 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 S.E. 536, 42 Ga. App. 165, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 273, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blaylock-v-kistner-gactapp-1930.