Doctor Shoop's Laboratories v. Davis

94 S.E. 822, 21 Ga. App. 623, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 441
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 22, 1918·No. 8902·Published

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

1. Documents introduced in evidence on the hearing before the trial judge must be incorporated in the bill of exceptions seeking to review his judgment, or attached thereto as exhibits, duly and properly identified, or be embraced in án approved brief of evidence and brought up as record. Civil Code (1910), §§ 6140, 6141; Anderson v. Anderson, 124 Ga. 147 (52 S. E. 161); Sayer v. Brown, 119 Ga. 539 (46 S. E. 649); Griffis v. Baxter, 119 Ga. 612 (46 S. E. 840); Eubank v. Eastman, 120 Ga. 1048 (48 S. E. 426).

2. “Where there is no brief of evidence at all, and documentary evidence is merely referred to in the bill of exceptions, this court can consider the same only so far as the contents of the documents are disclosed by the recitals in the bill of exceptions.” Hancock v. McNatt, 116 Ga. 297 (42 S. E. 525), and eases there cited.

3. The bill of exceptions in this case does not sufficiently show the character of the documentary evidence introduced on the trial below to enable this court to determine whether or not the judgment excepted to was erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, G. J., and Lulce, J., concur.

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

Doctor Shoop's Laboratories v. Davis, 94 S.E. 822, 21 Ga. App. 623, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 441 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

94 S.E. 822 (Doctor Shoop's Laboratories v. Davis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hancock v. McNatt
42 S.E. 525 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Sayer v. Brown
46 S.E. 649 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Griffis v. Baxter & Co.
46 S.E. 840 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Eubank v. Mayor of Eastman
48 S.E. 426 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Anderson v. Anderson
52 S.E. 161 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)