Fox v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Fox v. State

105 S.E. 314, 26 Ga. App. 21, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 243

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided December 15, 1920·No. 11455·Published

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) To a certified question from this court the Supreme Court answered, in substance, that the question as to the jurisdiction of the trial court was not raised in that court by the usual general grounds of the motion for a new trial, and that it could not be considered when made for the first time in this court. See full opinion of the Supreme Court, 150 Ga. 673 (104 S. E. 361). It follows from what [23]*23has been said that this court cannot hold that the lower court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Lulce and Bloodxvorbh, JJ.j concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) To a certified question from this court the Supreme Court answered, in substance, that the question as to the jurisdiction of the trial court was not raised in that court by the usual general grounds of the motion for a new trial, and that it could not be considered when made for the first time in this court. See full opinion of the Supreme Court, 150 Ga. 673 (104 S. E. 361). It follows from what [23]*23has been said that this court cannot hold that the lower court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Lulce and Bloodxvorbh, JJ.j concur.

Fox v. State, 105 S.E. 314, 26 Ga. App. 21, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 243 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

105 S.E. 314 (Fox v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related