Green v. Russell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Green v. Russell

168 S.E. 68, 46 Ga. App. 510, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 126

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 28, 1933

Docket22116

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 S.E. 68 (Green v. Russell) 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

Green v. Russell, 168 S.E. 68, 46 Ga. App. 510, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 126 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, O. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) Under the decision of the Supreme Court in this case, the person indicted was bound by his express waiver, in open court, of the alleged defect in the indictment, and by his express consent to allow the indictment to be then and there amended by the solicitor general; and upon the trial of the scire facias against the surety on the bond conditioned upon the appearance of her principal to abide the final sentence and judgment of the court, she could not plead the alleged defect, in the absence of her principal. If there be any conflict between the rulings of the Supreme Court in this case and the holding in Glover v. Dorsey, 27 Ga. App. 105 (107 S. E. 594), this court is bound to follow the adjudication of the Supreme Court. In view of these rulings, which control the case, none of the assignments of error in the bill of exceptions is meritorious; and 'the court properly rendered final judgment against the defendant surety and her absent principal for the sum of seven hundred and fifty dollars and costs. Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, O. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) Under the decision of the Supreme Court in this case, the person indicted was bound by his express waiver, in open court, of the alleged defect in the indictment, and by his express consent to allow the indictment to be then and there amended by the solicitor general; and upon the trial of the scire facias against the surety on the bond conditioned upon the appearance of her principal to abide the final sentence and judgment of the court, she could not plead the alleged defect, in the absence of her principal. If there be any conflict between the rulings of the Supreme Court in this case and the holding in Glover v. Dorsey, 27 Ga. App. 105 (107 S. E. 594), this court is bound to follow the adjudication of the Supreme Court. In view of these rulings, which control the case, none of the assignments of error in the bill of exceptions is meritorious; and 'the court properly rendered final judgment against the defendant surety and her absent principal for the sum of seven hundred and fifty dollars and costs. Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E. 68, 46 Ga. App. 510, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-v-russell-gactapp-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack