Cochran v. George

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Cochran v. George

97 S.E.2d 622, 95 Ga. App. 288, 1957 Ga. App. LEXIS 783

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1957

Docket36587

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 S.E.2d 622 (Cochran v. George) 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

Cochran v. George, 97 S.E.2d 622, 95 Ga. App. 288, 1957 Ga. App. LEXIS 783 (Ga. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, J.

The trial judge certified that the bill of exceptions was tendered to him on November 27, 1956, and during the same day he returned it to counsel for the plaintiff in error for corrections; the bill of exceptions was again tendered to him on January 2,1957, at which time he certified the same. Counsel for the plaintiff in error having delayed more than thirty days in returning the bill of exceptions to the trial judge, and it not appearing from the certificate of the judge that the delay was the result of a providential cause or imperative necessity, the writ of error is dismissed. Code (Ann. Supp.) § 6-909; Atkins v. Winter, 121 Ga. 75, 76 (48 S. E. 717); Bryant v. State, 74 Ga. App. 223 (39 S. E. 2d 452).

Writ of error dismissed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

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

Quillian, J.

The trial judge certified that the bill of exceptions was tendered to him on November 27, 1956, and during the same day he returned it to counsel for the plaintiff in error for corrections; the bill of exceptions was again tendered to him on January 2,1957, at which time he certified the same. Counsel for the plaintiff in error having delayed more than thirty days in returning the bill of exceptions to the trial judge, and it not appearing from the certificate of the judge that the delay was the result of a providential cause or imperative necessity, the writ of error is dismissed. Code (Ann. Supp.) § 6-909; Atkins v. Winter, 121 Ga. 75, 76 (48 S. E. 717); Bryant v. State, 74 Ga. App. 223 (39 S. E. 2d 452).

Writ of error dismissed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 S.E.2d 622, 95 Ga. App. 288, 1957 Ga. App. LEXIS 783, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cochran-v-george-gactapp-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack