BOSTIC v. NESBITT

Supreme Court of Georgia

BOSTIC v. NESBITT

71 S.E.2d 213, 209 Ga. 159, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 431

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 10, 1952

Docket17845

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 71 S.E.2d 213 (BOSTIC v. NESBITT) 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

BOSTIC v. NESBITT, 71 S.E.2d 213, 209 Ga. 159, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 431 (Ga. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Wyatt, Justice.

The bill of exceptions in this case was presented to the trial judge on the 26th day of December, 1951, and was certified by him on the 29th day of February, 1952. No reason appears in the certificate of the judge, nor is any shown by the record for the delay in signing the bill of exceptions. A motion to dismiss was filed and a response thereto made setting up certain facts. An oral request was made by the attorney for the defendant in error at the time of the argument to withdraw the motion to dismiss. This court, however, can not consider these matters or hear evidence thereon. See Dykes v. Brock, 128 Ga. 395 (57 S. E. 700). It is also the duty of this court, under many of its decisions, to determine its jurisdiction, whether or not there is a motion to dismiss. Under the rule laid down in Clay v. Floyd, 208 Ga. 374 (66 S. E. 2d, 916), and Amick v. Poteet, 208 Ga. 674 (68 S. E. 2d, 903), the bill of exceptions must be dismissed. In the two cases above cited,' Presiding Justice Atkinson and the author of this opinion dissented. In so far as the author is concerned, he has ■not changed his mind, but since the majority of the court is of a different opinion, it follows, the bill of exceptions must be dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P. J., not participating.

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

Wyatt, Justice.

The bill of exceptions in this case was presented to the trial judge on the 26th day of December, 1951, and was certified by him on the 29th day of February, 1952. No reason appears in the certificate of the judge, nor is any shown by the record for the delay in signing the bill of exceptions. A motion to dismiss was filed and a response thereto made setting up certain facts. An oral request was made by the attorney for the defendant in error at the time of the argument to withdraw the motion to dismiss. This court, however, can not consider these matters or hear evidence thereon. See Dykes v. Brock, 128 Ga. 395 (57 S. E. 700). It is also the duty of this court, under many of its decisions, to determine its jurisdiction, whether or not there is a motion to dismiss. Under the rule laid down in Clay v. Floyd, 208 Ga. 374 (66 S. E. 2d, 916), and Amick v. Poteet, 208 Ga. 674 (68 S. E. 2d, 903), the bill of exceptions must be dismissed. In the two cases above cited,' Presiding Justice Atkinson and the author of this opinion dissented. In so far as the author is concerned, he has ■not changed his mind, but since the majority of the court is of a different opinion, it follows, the bill of exceptions must be dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P. J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

71 S.E.2d 213, 209 Ga. 159, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 431, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bostic-v-nesbitt-ga-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack