Fowler v. Wheeler

Supreme Court of Georgia

Fowler v. Wheeler

167 S.E. 107, 176 Ga. 189, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 418

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedDecember 19, 1932

DocketNo. 9069

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 167 S.E. 107 (Fowler v. Wheeler) 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

Fowler v. Wheeler, 167 S.E. 107, 176 Ga. 189, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 418 (Ga. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, P. J.

Upon the trial of the case of Fowler and others against C. 0. Wheeler and R. W. Cochran as executors of the will of a named testator, the superior court sustained a general demurrer filed by the defendants, and to this judgment the plaintiffs excepted and sued out a writ of error to this court. No party defendant in the original suit was designated as defendant in error, the bill of exceptions merely reciting that the suit was brought against Wheeler and Cochran and Mrs. Elias Cochran, though in fact Mrs. Elias Cochran was neither named as a defendant nor served in the original suit. The motion to dismiss the writ of error must be sustained. The amendment proposing to add the word “executors” after the names of Wheeler and Cochran can not cure the defect in the bill of exceptions as it was sued out.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, P. J.

Upon the trial of the case of Fowler and others against C. 0. Wheeler and R. W. Cochran as executors of the will of a named testator, the superior court sustained a general demurrer filed by the defendants, and to this judgment the plaintiffs excepted and sued out a writ of error to this court. No party defendant in the original suit was designated as defendant in error, the bill of exceptions merely reciting that the suit was brought against Wheeler and Cochran and Mrs. Elias Cochran, though in fact Mrs. Elias Cochran was neither named as a defendant nor served in the original suit. The motion to dismiss the writ of error must be sustained. The amendment proposing to add the word “executors” after the names of Wheeler and Cochran can not cure the defect in the bill of exceptions as it was sued out.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

167 S.E. 107, 176 Ga. 189, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fowler-v-wheeler-ga-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack