Dove v. Alford

97 S.E. 890, 23 Ga. App. 195, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 36
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 14, 1919
Docket9703
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 S.E. 890 (Dove v. Alford) 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
Dove v. Alford, 97 S.E. 890, 23 Ga. App. 195, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 36 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

Where the defendant to a suit in the superior court fails to answer at the appearance term, but the judge fails during that term to enter the case as in default, it is the right and privilege of the defendant, so long as the case is pending and not so marked, to file his defense at a subsequent term. But the mere failure of the judge during the first term to mark the case on the docket as in default does not give the defendant the additional right to treat the subsequent term at which his plea is filed as the appearance term, and to require that the case go over to still another term for trial.

Judgment 'affirmed.

Wade, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Related

Gregg v. Fitzpatrick
187 S.E. 730 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 S.E. 890, 23 Ga. App. 195, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 36, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dove-v-alford-gactapp-1919.