Hicks v. Walker

30 S.E. 383, 105 Ga. 480, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 575
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided April 1, 1898·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Lewis, J.

Where two-actions in favor of the same plaintiff, but against different defendants, were consolidated in the court below and referred to an auditor, who' reported thereon, making separate findings against each defendant; and where the defendants joined in filing exceptions to the auditor’s report, this court has no jurisdiction to entertain a bill of exceptions, in which both the defendants unite, complaining of error in the judgment of the court disallowing their exceptions to the auditor’s report. Western Assurance Co. v. Way, 98 Ga. 746.

Writ of' error dismissed.

All concurring, except Cobb, J., absent.

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

Hicks v. Walker, 30 S.E. 383, 105 Ga. 480, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 575 (Ga. 1898).

30 S.E. 383 (Hicks v. Walker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ambos v. Chastain
43 S.E.2d 592 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Shouse v. Gober
167 S.E. 316 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Pearson v. Stamey
163 S.E. 264 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Wall v. Mann
135 S.E. 407 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Harper v. Stumpff
1921 OK 430 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1921)
Paschal v. Morgan
91 S.E. 285 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Jones v. Maril
91 S.E. 445 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Heitmann v. Commercial Bank
65 S.E. 590 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Walker v. Conn & Co.
37 S.E. 403 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1900)
Bates v. Harris
37 S.E. 105 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1900)