Harrell v. Tift

70 Ga. 730
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 13, 1883
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 70 Ga. 730 (Harrell v. Tift) 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.

Bluebook
Harrell v. Tift, 70 Ga. 730 (Ga. 1883).

Opinion

A case cannot be brought to this court for adjudication by direct ex- . ception solely to a ruling made pendente lite. There must be a valid exception to some final ruling of the court below, on which to predicate other assignments of error

(a.) A bill of exceptions stated that the defendant below offered a certain document in evidence, which was rejected, on objection by [731]*731the plaintiff, “to which ruling and decision of the court in refusing to admit said evidence and in sustaining the objection of plaintiff, defendant excepts. The defendant having offered no other testimony, the case was submitted to the jury. The jury retired and returned a verdict for the plaintiff, and now within the past thirty days from the close of the term of the court aforesaid, the defendant tenders this, his bill of exceptions,” etc:

Held, that there was no proper assignment of error.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Related

Carpenter v. State Ex Rel. Hains
21 S.E.2d 643 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)
Good v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
21 S.E.2d 209 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1942)
Hannah v. Farmers & Merchants Bank
179 S.E. 141 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Bridges v. Poole
168 S.E. 577 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1933)
Bush v. Little
154 S.E. 886 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)
Farmer v. White Sewing Machine Co.
116 S.E. 224 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Winder Lumber Co. v. Washington Brick Co.
99 S.E. 863 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)
Woodall v. Harris
95 S.E. 377 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)
Mertins v. Pritchard
70 S.E. 328 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1911)
Morris v. Dougherty
63 S.E. 1114 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1909)
Anderson v. Hall
60 S.E. 294 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Lyndon v. Georgia Railway & Electric Co.
58 S.E. 1047 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907)
Anderson v. Wyche
55 S.E. 19 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Hendricks v. Reid
54 S.E. 747 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Montgomery v. Reynolds
53 S.E. 512 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)
Henderson v. State
51 S.E. 764 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Kibben v. Coastwise Dredging Co.
48 S.E. 330 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 Ga. 730, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrell-v-tift-ga-1883.