Hight v. Atlanta Telephone & Telegraph Co.

89 S.E. 430, 18 Ga. App. 432, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 394
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 12, 1916
Docket7191
StatusPublished

This text of 89 S.E. 430 (Hight v. Atlanta Telephone & Telegraph Co.) 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
Hight v. Atlanta Telephone & Telegraph Co., 89 S.E. 430, 18 Ga. App. 432, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 394 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Hodges, J.

The answer to the petition for certiorari not affirmatively showing that a final judgment was rendered, the judge of the superior court did not err in dismissing the certiorari. A motion to postpone the hearing of the certiorari in the superior court was not the remedy. Exceptions to the answer should have been taken by the party whose rights were affected by the incomplete answer. Civil Code, § 5196; Ford v. Toomer, 116 Ga. 795 (43 S. E. 45); Stoner v. Magins, 116 Ga. 797 (43 S. E. 45). Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Ford v. Toomer
43 S.E. 45 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)
Stoner v. Magins
43 S.E. 45 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
89 S.E. 430, 18 Ga. App. 432, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hight-v-atlanta-telephone-telegraph-co-gactapp-1916.