Haley v. Commercial National Bank
This text of 94 S.E. 1013 (Haley v. Commercial National Bank) 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.
Opinion
When the object of a receivership in an equitable action had been accomplished, an issue was raised as to the arnount of fees to be paid to the receiver and to the attorneys. The issue was tried by the court without the intervention of a jury, and upon the conclusion of the evidence specified sums were separately awarded to the receiver and to the attorneys. The bill of exceptions, after reciting the facts as indicated, assigned'error as follows: “to which ruling and order of the court the plaintiff in error then and there excepted, and now excepts and assigns the same as error.” H'eld, that this was an' insufficient assignment of error; and the writ of error, on motion, is dismissed. Wheeler v. Worley, 110 Ga. 513 (35 S. E. 639); Fidelity & Deposit Co. v. Anderson, 102 Ga. 551 (28 S. E. 382); Mutual Bldg. & Loan Asso. v. [556]*556Glessner, 99 Ga. 747 (27 S. E. 187); Hall v. Huff, 74 Ga. 409; Adams v. May, 145 Ga. 234 (88 S. E. 928).
Writ of error dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
94 S.E. 1013, 147 Ga. 555, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haley-v-commercial-national-bank-ga-1918.