Farr v. State

Supreme Court of Georgia

Farr v. State

37 S.E. 880, 112 Ga. 540, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 4

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 24, 1901

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 37 S.E. 880 (Farr v. State) 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

Farr v. State, 37 S.E. 880, 112 Ga. 540, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 4 (Ga. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court.

When a case, because of the failure of counsel for the plaintiff in error to appear, either in person or by brief, and prosecute the same, is dismissed, it will not, even by consent, be reinstated upon a showing that such counsel mailed his briefs in time to reach the court before the case was called for a hearing. On the contrary, it must be held that such counsel took the risk of delays in the mail. See 24th Hule of Supreme Court, Civil Code, § 5621; Osborn v. Hale, 70 Ga. 731.

Motion to reinstate denied.

All the Justices concurring,

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

By the Court.

When a case, because of the failure of counsel for the plaintiff in error to appear, either in person or by brief, and prosecute the same, is dismissed, it will not, even by consent, be reinstated upon a showing that such counsel mailed his briefs in time to reach the court before the case was called for a hearing. On the contrary, it must be held that such counsel took the risk of delays in the mail. See 24th Hule of Supreme Court, Civil Code, § 5621; Osborn v. Hale, 70 Ga. 731.

Motion to reinstate denied.

All the Justices concurring,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 S.E. 880, 112 Ga. 540, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farr-v-state-ga-1901.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack