Gilbert v. King & Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gilbert v. King & Co.

57 S.E. 991, 1 Ga. App. 572, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 43

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 11, 1907

Docket23

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 S.E. 991 (Gilbert v. King & Co.) 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

Gilbert v. King & Co., 57 S.E. 991, 1 Ga. App. 572, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 43 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

A petition for certiorari sets out tlie facts of a trial, a brief of the evidence, and tliat the judgment of the justice was adverse to petitioner, and closes with the following assignment of error: “Said judgment is contrary to law and equity and without evidence to sup[573]*573port it, which judgment now assigns as error, and contends that the contract sued on in this case is usurious, unconstitutional, and therefore illegal, and prays that the same may he set aside.” Held, that the assignment of error is too general, and nothing can he considered under it except whether the finding was supported hy the evidence.

Certiorari, from Fulton superior court — Judge Pendleton. March 30, 1906.

Submitted February 37, Decided April 11, 1907. El. T. Williams, Bev. W. Wall, for plaintiff in error.

2. The judgment of the justice is supported by the evidence, and the judgment of the superior court in denying the writ of certiorari is

Affirmed,

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

Hill, C. J.

A petition for certiorari sets out tlie facts of a trial, a brief of the evidence, and tliat the judgment of the justice was adverse to petitioner, and closes with the following assignment of error: “Said judgment is contrary to law and equity and without evidence to sup[573]*573port it, which judgment now assigns as error, and contends that the contract sued on in this case is usurious, unconstitutional, and therefore illegal, and prays that the same may he set aside.” Held, that the assignment of error is too general, and nothing can he considered under it except whether the finding was supported hy the evidence.

Certiorari, from Fulton superior court — Judge Pendleton. March 30, 1906.

Submitted February 37, Decided April 11, 1907. El. T. Williams, Bev. W. Wall, for plaintiff in error.

2. The judgment of the justice is supported by the evidence, and the judgment of the superior court in denying the writ of certiorari is

Affirmed,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 S.E. 991, 1 Ga. App. 572, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 43, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilbert-v-king-co-gactapp-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack