Burruss-Manley Co. v. Lewis
70 S.E. 27, 8 Ga. App. 552, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 39
Opinion
1. It is not valid ground for the dismissal of a petition for certiorari that one of the attorneys in the case wrote the answer of the magistrate, though this would he ground for exception to the answer. See Kelly v. Young, ante, 551.
2. The judge had the discretion to sustain the certiorari and grant a new trial (irrespective of whether the reason assigned be meritorious or not), as the evidence was conflicting. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Burruss-Manley Co. v. Lewis, 70 S.E. 27, 8 Ga. App. 552, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 39 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).
70 S.E. 27 (Burruss-Manley Co. v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brooks v. Ivy H. Smith Construction Co.
3 S.E.2d 111 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Gresham v. Lee
112 S.E. 524 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)