Ellis v. Rudeseal

Supreme Court of Georgia

Ellis v. Rudeseal

191 S.E. 913, 184 Ga. 519, 1937 Ga. LEXIS 554

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJune 18, 1937

DocketNo. 11697

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 191 S.E. 913 (Ellis v. Rudeseal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ellis v. Rudeseal, 191 S.E. 913, 184 Ga. 519, 1937 Ga. LEXIS 554 (Ga. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of the question propounded by the Court of Appeals, the court consisting of six Justices is equally divided in opinion, Chief Justice Russell and Associate Justices Atkinson and Jenkins being of the opinion that the question should be answered in the negative, and Presiding Justice Beck and Associate Justices Bell and Hutcheson being of the contrary opinion. Therefore the question is returned to the Court of Appeals without an answer.

M. B. Eubanks, for plaintiff in error. Maddox & Griffin, contra.

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

Per Curiam.

Upon consideration of the question propounded by the Court of Appeals, the court consisting of six Justices is equally divided in opinion, Chief Justice Russell and Associate Justices Atkinson and Jenkins being of the opinion that the question should be answered in the negative, and Presiding Justice Beck and Associate Justices Bell and Hutcheson being of the contrary opinion. Therefore the question is returned to the Court of Appeals without an answer.

M. B. Eubanks, for plaintiff in error. Maddox & Griffin, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 S.E. 913, 184 Ga. 519, 1937 Ga. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ellis-v-rudeseal-ga-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack