Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Hicks v. Lindsey

Hicks v. Lindsey

94 S.E. 259, 21 Ga. App. 319, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 580
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 16, 1917
Docket8807
StatusPublished

This text of 94 S.E. 259 (Hicks v. Lindsey) 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
Hicks v. Lindsey, 94 S.E. 259, 21 Ga. App. 319, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 580 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Luke, J.

The allegations contained in the petition for certiorari are sufficient to require the sanction of the same, and it was error for the court to refuse the sanction.

Judgment reversed.

Wade, O. J., and Jenkins, J., concur. Petition for certiorari; from Berrien superior court — Judge Thomas. April 14, 1917. Hendricks, Mills & Hendricks, for plaintiff in error. J.' P. Knight, contra.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 S.E. 259, 21 Ga. App. 319, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 580, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hicks-v-lindsey-gactapp-1917.