Chaffin v. Chaffin

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Chaffin v. Chaffin

53 S.E.2d 577, 79 Ga. App. 258, 1949 Ga. App. LEXIS 633

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 13, 1949

Docket32429.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 53 S.E.2d 577 (Chaffin v. Chaffin) 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

Chaffin v. Chaffin, 53 S.E.2d 577, 79 Ga. App. 258, 1949 Ga. App. LEXIS 633 (Ga. Ct. App. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Parker, J.

Upon the hearing in the superior court of a petition for certiorari from the Civil Court of Fulton County, it appeared that “a full verbatim copy of the petition for certiorari and the order of sanction *259 was served upon defendant by serving his counsel with the same on said date instant after said petition was sanctioned and the writ issued herein.” It did not appear that 10 days’ notice was given to the opposite party, his agent, or attorney of “the time and place of hearing,” or that the giving of such notice was prevented by unavoidable cause, as prescribed and required by the Code, § 19-212; and the superior court did not err in dismissing the certiorari for lack of proper notice to the defendant. See Chaffin v. Chaffim, ante, and cases cited therein.

Decided May 13, 1949. Charles W. Anderson, J. Milam Morris Jr., for plaintiff in error. Lucian J. Endicott, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Sutton, C. J., and Felton, J., concur.

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

Parker, J.

Upon the hearing in the superior court of a petition for certiorari from the Civil Court of Fulton County, it appeared that “a full verbatim copy of the petition for certiorari and the order of sanction *259 was served upon defendant by serving his counsel with the same on said date instant after said petition was sanctioned and the writ issued herein.” It did not appear that 10 days’ notice was given to the opposite party, his agent, or attorney of “the time and place of hearing,” or that the giving of such notice was prevented by unavoidable cause, as prescribed and required by the Code, § 19-212; and the superior court did not err in dismissing the certiorari for lack of proper notice to the defendant. See Chaffin v. Chaffim, ante, and cases cited therein.

Decided May 13, 1949. Charles W. Anderson, J. Milam Morris Jr., for plaintiff in error. Lucian J. Endicott, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Sutton, C. J., and Felton, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

53 S.E.2d 577, 79 Ga. App. 258, 1949 Ga. App. LEXIS 633, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chaffin-v-chaffin-gactapp-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack