Christopher v. Crovatt

Supreme Court of Georgia

Christopher v. Crovatt

95 S.E. 233, 147 Ga. 632, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 82

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1918

DocketNo. 534

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 95 S.E. 233 (Christopher v. Crovatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Christopher v. Crovatt, 95 S.E. 233, 147 Ga. 632, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 82 (Ga. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

The plaintiffs applied to the superior court for leave to file information in the nature of a writ of quo warranto for the purpose of determining the title to the offices held by the solicitor and the assistant solicitor of the city court of Brunswick, on the ground that said officials were holding offices of emolument under the United States government. Since the submission of the case to this court, and before the decision was reached, both of these officers have ceased to hold the said offices, and their successors have been appointed and qualified. The only issues raised have therefore become moot. This court will not decide a case solely to determine .the matter of costs. Tabor v. Hipp, 136 Ga. 123 (2) (70 S. E. 886, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 246) ; Carter v. Gabrels, 136 Ga. 177 (71 S. E. 3); Southern Express Co. v. Atlanta, 146 Ga. 704 (92 S. E. 48); Westberry v. Price, 146 Ga. 126 (90 S. E. 853).

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, J.

The plaintiffs applied to the superior court for leave to file information in the nature of a writ of quo warranto for the purpose of determining the title to the offices held by the solicitor and the assistant solicitor of the city court of Brunswick, on the ground that said officials were holding offices of emolument under the United States government. Since the submission of the case to this court, and before the decision was reached, both of these officers have ceased to hold the said offices, and their successors have been appointed and qualified. The only issues raised have therefore become moot. This court will not decide a case solely to determine .the matter of costs. Tabor v. Hipp, 136 Ga. 123 (2) (70 S. E. 886, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 246) ; Carter v. Gabrels, 136 Ga. 177 (71 S. E. 3); Southern Express Co. v. Atlanta, 146 Ga. 704 (92 S. E. 48); Westberry v. Price, 146 Ga. 126 (90 S. E. 853).

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 S.E. 233, 147 Ga. 632, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-v-crovatt-ga-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack