Green v. Lingo

181 S.E. 148, 180 Ga. 853, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 581
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided August 7, 1935·No. No. 10590·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

1. Assignments of error not argued or insisted upon in the brief of the attorney for the plaintiff in error will be treated by the Supreme Court as abandoned. Johnson v. State, 177 Ga. 312 (3) (170 S. E. 235) ; Wilkinson v. Smith, 179 Ga. 507 (3) (176 S. E. 373).

2. A statement of facts .in the brief of the attorney for the plaintiff in error, with request to be allowed to file a brief on the law of the ease within a definite time, will not amount to argument or. insistence upon the assignments of error made in the bill of exceptions, where no such brief is subsequently filed.'

3. The abandonment of all assignments of error is equivalent to abandonment of the ease. Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices eoneur.

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

Green v. Lingo, 181 S.E. 148, 180 Ga. 853, 1935 Ga. LEXIS 581 (Ga. 1935).

181 S.E. 148 (Green v. Lingo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Essig v. Cheves
44 S.E.2d 712 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Evans v. State
194 S.E. 873 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)