Byrd v. Byrd

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Byrd v. Byrd

274 S.E.2d 167, 156 Ga. App. 655, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 3160

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 6, 1980

Docket60440

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 274 S.E.2d 167 (Byrd v. Byrd) 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

Byrd v. Byrd, 274 S.E.2d 167, 156 Ga. App. 655, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 3160 (Ga. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

Birdsong, Judge.

Garnishment. Appellee filed a garnishment against appellant in the State Court of Fulton County. A traverse was filed by appellant and, after evidence being presented, the traverse was denied. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were waived. No transcript of the evidence was filed with this court. Held:

As the appellant waived the findings of fact and conclusions of law and presents no transcript of the evidence in Fulton State Court, we have no basis on which to conclude the trial court erred in denying her traverse. We presume the trial court’s ruling was authorized by the evidence, and appellant here has shown us no reason that we should not. See Harbin Lumber Co. v. Fowler, 142 Ga. App. 167-168 (235 SE2d 638); Chapman v. Connor, 138 Ga. App. 518 (226 SE2d 625). We therefore affirm the judgment below.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, C. J., and Sognier, J., concur.

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

Birdsong, Judge.

Garnishment. Appellee filed a garnishment against appellant in the State Court of Fulton County. A traverse was filed by appellant and, after evidence being presented, the traverse was denied. Findings of fact and conclusions of law were waived. No transcript of the evidence was filed with this court. Held:

As the appellant waived the findings of fact and conclusions of law and presents no transcript of the evidence in Fulton State Court, we have no basis on which to conclude the trial court erred in denying her traverse. We presume the trial court’s ruling was authorized by the evidence, and appellant here has shown us no reason that we should not. See Harbin Lumber Co. v. Fowler, 142 Ga. App. 167-168 (235 SE2d 638); Chapman v. Connor, 138 Ga. App. 518 (226 SE2d 625). We therefore affirm the judgment below.

Judgment affirmed.

Deen, C. J., and Sognier, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

274 S.E.2d 167, 156 Ga. App. 655, 1980 Ga. App. LEXIS 3160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byrd-v-byrd-gactapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack