Cauley v. Godwin

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cauley v. Godwin

116 S.E.2d 535, 102 Ga. App. 413, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 636

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 22, 1960

Docket38440

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 116 S.E.2d 535 (Cauley v. Godwin) 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

Cauley v. Godwin, 116 S.E.2d 535, 102 Ga. App. 413, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 636 (Ga. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

A purported acknowledgment of service in the following language is not an acknowledgment of service of the bill of exception: “Due and legal notice of the within bill of exceptions is hereby acknowledged and it is further agreed that the contents of this bill of exceptions are true and correct.” It is only an acknowledgment of notice of a bill of [414]*414exception to be submitted to the judge for certification. Such a writ of error will be dismissed on motion. Code Ann. § 6-911. Cleveland v. Wacaster, 186 Ga. 662 (198 S. E. 708); Knight v. Georgia Power Co., 95 Ga. App. 289 (97 S. E. 2d 643); Miller v. Riegel Textile Corp., 86 Ga. App. 554 (71 S. E. 2d 574).

Decided September 22, 1960. Earl Staples, for plaintiffs in error. Gilbert & Head, Howe & Murphy, Henry C. Head, Harold L. Murphy, contra.

The motion to dismiss the writ of error is granted and the writ is

Dismissed.

Nichols and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

A purported acknowledgment of service in the following language is not an acknowledgment of service of the bill of exception: “Due and legal notice of the within bill of exceptions is hereby acknowledged and it is further agreed that the contents of this bill of exceptions are true and correct.” It is only an acknowledgment of notice of a bill of [414]*414exception to be submitted to the judge for certification. Such a writ of error will be dismissed on motion. Code Ann. § 6-911. Cleveland v. Wacaster, 186 Ga. 662 (198 S. E. 708); Knight v. Georgia Power Co., 95 Ga. App. 289 (97 S. E. 2d 643); Miller v. Riegel Textile Corp., 86 Ga. App. 554 (71 S. E. 2d 574).

Decided September 22, 1960. Earl Staples, for plaintiffs in error. Gilbert & Head, Howe & Murphy, Henry C. Head, Harold L. Murphy, contra.

The motion to dismiss the writ of error is granted and the writ is

Dismissed.

Nichols and Bell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 S.E.2d 535, 102 Ga. App. 413, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cauley-v-godwin-gactapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack