Ederheimer, Stein & Co. v. Carson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Ederheimer, Stein & Co. v. Carson

81 S.E. 815, 14 Ga. App. 541, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 372

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 14, 1914

Docket5439

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 81 S.E. 815 (Ederheimer, Stein & Co. v. Carson) 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

Ederheimer, Stein & Co. v. Carson, 81 S.E. 815, 14 Ga. App. 541, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 372 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Roan, J.

When this case was first before this court, it was held that the evidence demanded 'a verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. And when the case afterwards came up, on the refusal of the judge of the superior court to sanction the plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari, the Court of Appeals ruled that the defendant was estopped from setting up discharge in bankruptcy as a defense, and again ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover, as a matter of law, on the evidence in the case. These two decisions (cited supra) seem to have eliminated all questions of fact.from the case; and, there being no question of fact involved which made it necessary to send the case back for a hearing on its merits before the city court, it was the duty of the judge of the superior court to make a final decision in the case without sending it back to the city court. Civil Code, § 5201; Greenwood v. Boyd & Baxter Furniture Factory, 86 Ga. 582 (13 S. E. 128); James v. Smith, 62 Ga. 345.

Judgment reversed.

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

Roan, J.

When this case was first before this court, it was held that the evidence demanded 'a verdict in the plaintiffs’ favor. And when the case afterwards came up, on the refusal of the judge of the superior court to sanction the plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari, the Court of Appeals ruled that the defendant was estopped from setting up discharge in bankruptcy as a defense, and again ruled that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover, as a matter of law, on the evidence in the case. These two decisions (cited supra) seem to have eliminated all questions of fact.from the case; and, there being no question of fact involved which made it necessary to send the case back for a hearing on its merits before the city court, it was the duty of the judge of the superior court to make a final decision in the case without sending it back to the city court. Civil Code, § 5201; Greenwood v. Boyd & Baxter Furniture Factory, 86 Ga. 582 (13 S. E. 128); James v. Smith, 62 Ga. 345.

Judgment reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

81 S.E. 815, 14 Ga. App. 541, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ederheimer-stein-co-v-carson-gactapp-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack