Cantrell v. Abernathy

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cantrell v. Abernathy

170 S.E.2d 319, 120 Ga. App. 318, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 761

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 19, 1969

Docket44592

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 170 S.E.2d 319 (Cantrell v. Abernathy) 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

Cantrell v. Abernathy, 170 S.E.2d 319, 120 Ga. App. 318, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 761 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Judge.

1. Where no transcript of evidence is filed all grounds requiring a consideration of evidence must be affirmed. Cofield v. Johnson, 118 Ga. App. 689 (165 SE2d 472).

2. The appellants contend that they were deprived of their constitutional right to due process because they were not properly notified of the proceeding and were not given a right to obtain an attorney. There is nothing to show these issues were raised in the lower court.

Constitutional questions cannot be considered by the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court where it does not appear from the record that they were raised in the trial court. Smith v. Dallas Utility Co., 27 Ga. App. 22 (107 SE 381); Herrington v. City of Atlanta, 224 Ga. 465 (5) (162 SE2d 420). There is no merit in the enumeration of errors.

Judgment affirmed.

Pannell and Evans, JJ., concur.

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