Bode v. NORTHEAST REALTY COMPANY, INC.

160 S.E.2d 228, 117 Ga. App. 226, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1041
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 29, 1968
Docket43017
StatusPublished
Cited by15 cases

This text of 160 S.E.2d 228 (Bode v. NORTHEAST REALTY COMPANY, INC.) 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
Bode v. NORTHEAST REALTY COMPANY, INC., 160 S.E.2d 228, 117 Ga. App. 226, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1041 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968).

Opinion

Pannell, Judge.

1. The brief filed by the appellant in this case does not meet the requirements of Rule 17 (a) (1) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (A) and Rule 17 (c) (3) (B) of this court adopted by it on July 21, 1965, and effective August 1, 1965, in that there is no citation or reference to the record or transcript. Accordingly, under the decisions of the court in Strickland v. English, 115 Ga. App. 384 (2) (154 SE2d 710) and Crider v. State of Ga., 115 Ga. App. 347 (1) (154 SE2d 743) the enumerations of error for which there is no reference made in either the enumeration or the brief will be considered as abandoned.

*227 Argued September 7, 1967 — Decided January 29, 1968 Rehearing denied February 13, 1968 Thibadeau & Smith, Richard A. Thibadeau, for appellants. Hatcher, Meyerson, Oxford & Irvin, Stanley P. Meyerson, for appellees.

2. Upon motion of the appellee that the brief of appellant be “dismissed” for this reason, the appellant filed what it called its supplemental brief and amendment to the original brief. This amendment sought to add these references by referring to certain words on certain pages of the brief and providing that there “be added after the words” certain particular references to the transcript only. This court under the circumstances will not seek to find these phrases in the brief and add the references to the transcript thereon. This is the duty of the appellant, not of the court. While the brief consists of only 14 pages, it could consist of any number of pages and this court cannot indulge the appellant by performing the detail work of transferring these “amended” references to the brief in order to save the enumerations from abandonment.

3. Those enumerations of error relating to the absence of evidence are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, P. J., and Whitman, J., concur.

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

Related

Justice v. Dunbar
264 S.E.2d 301 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Cowart v. Webster
263 S.E.2d 277 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Grizzard v. Petkas
246 S.E.2d 375 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Brooks v. ROLEY & ROLEY ENGINEERS, INC.
240 S.E.2d 596 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Baker v. State
238 S.E.2d 241 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1977)
Ricks v. State
231 S.E.2d 113 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Jester v. State
211 S.E.2d 909 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Sturgis v. State
195 S.E.2d 682 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Burchfield v. Byers
173 S.E.2d 230 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1970)
Dimmick v. Pullen
172 S.E.2d 196 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Georgia Stainless Steel Corp. v. Bacon
170 S.E.2d 270 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Cohen v. Garland
167 S.E.2d 599 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 S.E.2d 228, 117 Ga. App. 226, 1968 Ga. App. LEXIS 1041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bode-v-northeast-realty-company-inc-gactapp-1968.