Colonial Stages South Inc. v. Levy

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Colonial Stages South Inc. v. Levy

166 S.E. 442, 46 Ga. App. 53, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 39

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 17, 1932

Docket22554

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 166 S.E. 442 (Colonial Stages South Inc. v. Levy) 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

Colonial Stages South Inc. v. Levy, 166 S.E. 442, 46 Ga. App. 53, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 39 (Ga. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. A judgment sustaining a plea of res judicata to a suit, though generally controlling, is not “final,” within the meaning of section 6138 of the Civil Code of 1910, and this is true although the necessary effect of the judgment is to entitle the defendant, as a matter of course, to a judgment dismissing the suit; and a direct bill of exceptions will not lie to such a judgment. Johnson v. Battle, 120 Ga. 649 (48 S. E. 128); City of Tallapoosa v. Brock, 143 Ga. 599 (85 S. E. 755); W. & A. R. Co. v. Williams, 146 Ga. 27 (90 S. E. 478); Brock v. Tal[54]*54lapoosa, 19 Ga. App. 793 (92 S. E. 289); English v. Rosenkrantz, 150 Ga. 745 (105 S. E. 292); English v. Rosenkrantz, 26 Ga. App. 116 (105 S. E. 657).

Decided November 17, 1932. Paul J. Varner, Joseph II. Boss, for plaintiff in error., Tyson & Tyson, contra.

2-, In the instant ease the bill of exceptions contains only three assignments of error. The first is on a judgment overruling a demurrer to a plea of res judicata; the second is on a judgment striking a traverse to the plea of res judicata; and the third is on a judgment sustaining the plea of res judicata. A direct bill of exceptions will not lie to any of these judgments, and this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the case.

Wril of error dismissed.

Hooper, J., concurs. MacIntyre, J., not presiding.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. A judgment sustaining a plea of res judicata to a suit, though generally controlling, is not “final,” within the meaning of section 6138 of the Civil Code of 1910, and this is true although the necessary effect of the judgment is to entitle the defendant, as a matter of course, to a judgment dismissing the suit; and a direct bill of exceptions will not lie to such a judgment. Johnson v. Battle, 120 Ga. 649 (48 S. E. 128); City of Tallapoosa v. Brock, 143 Ga. 599 (85 S. E. 755); W. & A. R. Co. v. Williams, 146 Ga. 27 (90 S. E. 478); Brock v. Tal[54]*54lapoosa, 19 Ga. App. 793 (92 S. E. 289); English v. Rosenkrantz, 150 Ga. 745 (105 S. E. 292); English v. Rosenkrantz, 26 Ga. App. 116 (105 S. E. 657).

Decided November 17, 1932. Paul J. Varner, Joseph II. Boss, for plaintiff in error., Tyson & Tyson, contra.

2-, In the instant ease the bill of exceptions contains only three assignments of error. The first is on a judgment overruling a demurrer to a plea of res judicata; the second is on a judgment striking a traverse to the plea of res judicata; and the third is on a judgment sustaining the plea of res judicata. A direct bill of exceptions will not lie to any of these judgments, and this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the case.

Wril of error dismissed.

Hooper, J., concurs. MacIntyre, J., not presiding.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

166 S.E. 442, 46 Ga. App. 53, 1932 Ga. App. LEXIS 39, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colonial-stages-south-inc-v-levy-gactapp-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack