Brantley v. Thompson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Brantley v. Thompson

114 S.E.2d 60, 101 Ga. App. 257, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 847

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 19, 1960

Docket38026, 38027

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 114 S.E.2d 60 (Brantley v. Thompson) 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

Brantley v. Thompson, 114 S.E.2d 60, 101 Ga. App. 257, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 847 (Ga. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Carlisle, Judge.

The final judgments excepted to in each of these cases are the overruling of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and the overruling of a motion for a new trial. These judgments were entered on August 13, 1959'. In each of these, the bill of exceptions is marked “ ‘Tendered’ September 11th, 1959” and signed by the clerk of the superior court. The judge’s certificates are in regular form and are dated the 30th day of September, 1959, which was more than 30 days from the date of the final judgment. It does not affirmatively appear from the bill of exceptions or from the judge’s certificate thereto that the judge was absent from the circuit on the date that the bill of exceptions was tendered to the clerk of the superior court, and there is no presumption that he was absent from the circuit at that time. State Highway Department v. Strange, 100 Ga. App. 649 (112 S. E. 2d 285). Under the foregoing rales of law, it does not affirmatively appear that the bills of exceptions in these cases were tendered within the time provided by law and this court is, therefore, without jurisdiction to consider the writs of error. Capers v. Ball, 211 Ga. 502 (87 S. E. 2d 85).

Writs of error dismissed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur.

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

Carlisle, Judge.

The final judgments excepted to in each of these cases are the overruling of a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and the overruling of a motion for a new trial. These judgments were entered on August 13, 1959'. In each of these, the bill of exceptions is marked “ ‘Tendered’ September 11th, 1959” and signed by the clerk of the superior court. The judge’s certificates are in regular form and are dated the 30th day of September, 1959, which was more than 30 days from the date of the final judgment. It does not affirmatively appear from the bill of exceptions or from the judge’s certificate thereto that the judge was absent from the circuit on the date that the bill of exceptions was tendered to the clerk of the superior court, and there is no presumption that he was absent from the circuit at that time. State Highway Department v. Strange, 100 Ga. App. 649 (112 S. E. 2d 285). Under the foregoing rales of law, it does not affirmatively appear that the bills of exceptions in these cases were tendered within the time provided by law and this court is, therefore, without jurisdiction to consider the writs of error. Capers v. Ball, 211 Ga. 502 (87 S. E. 2d 85).

Writs of error dismissed.

Gardner, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 S.E.2d 60, 101 Ga. App. 257, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brantley-v-thompson-gactapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack