Feldman v. Benson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Feldman v. Benson

84 S.E.2d 710, 90 Ga. App. 824, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 822

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 14, 1954

Docket35184

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 84 S.E.2d 710 (Feldman v. Benson) 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

Feldman v. Benson, 84 S.E.2d 710, 90 Ga. App. 824, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 822 (Ga. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

Nichols, J.

Service by mail of a bill of exceptions upon parties residing in this State is insufficient to enable this court to take jurisdiction of a writ of error. Clark v. Lyon, 48 Ga. 125. Since no return of service, or acknowledgment or waiver thereof, appears, other than the certificate of counsel for the plaintiff in error that he had served counsel for the defendants in error with copies of the bill of exceptions by depositing the copies in the United States mail in a properly addressed envelope with adequate postage, the motion to dismiss the writ of error because it was not served in accordance with law must be sustained. Albritton v. Tygart, 139 Ga. 231 (77 S. E. 28); Presley v. Jones & Oglesby, 139 Ga. 814 (78 S. E. 126); Ownby v. Wager, 66 Ga. App. 37 (16 S. E. 2d 906); Hardy v. Bank of Ila, 67 Ga. App. 299 (20 S. E. 2d 94); Burgess v. Keene, 85 Ga. App. 548 (69 S. E. 2d 885). The act of 1953 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., pp. 440, 455, par. 8), amending Code § 6-911 so as to permit service to be shown by “an unverified certification of one of counsel for plaintiff in error,” does not authorize service of a bill of exceptions by mail.

Writ of error dismissed.

Felton, C. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

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

Nichols, J.

Service by mail of a bill of exceptions upon parties residing in this State is insufficient to enable this court to take jurisdiction of a writ of error. Clark v. Lyon, 48 Ga. 125. Since no return of service, or acknowledgment or waiver thereof, appears, other than the certificate of counsel for the plaintiff in error that he had served counsel for the defendants in error with copies of the bill of exceptions by depositing the copies in the United States mail in a properly addressed envelope with adequate postage, the motion to dismiss the writ of error because it was not served in accordance with law must be sustained. Albritton v. Tygart, 139 Ga. 231 (77 S. E. 28); Presley v. Jones & Oglesby, 139 Ga. 814 (78 S. E. 126); Ownby v. Wager, 66 Ga. App. 37 (16 S. E. 2d 906); Hardy v. Bank of Ila, 67 Ga. App. 299 (20 S. E. 2d 94); Burgess v. Keene, 85 Ga. App. 548 (69 S. E. 2d 885). The act of 1953 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., pp. 440, 455, par. 8), amending Code § 6-911 so as to permit service to be shown by “an unverified certification of one of counsel for plaintiff in error,” does not authorize service of a bill of exceptions by mail.

Writ of error dismissed.

Felton, C. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 S.E.2d 710, 90 Ga. App. 824, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feldman-v-benson-gactapp-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack