Hightower v. Davis

102 S.E. 34, 24 Ga. App. 689, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 457
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 27, 1920
Docket10950
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 102 S.E. 34 (Hightower v. Davis) 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
Hightower v. Davis, 102 S.E. 34, 24 Ga. App. 689, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 457 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. An unsanetioned petition for certiorari can not be specified or sent up as part of-the record. It should be incorporated in the bill of exceptions or be verified as a part thereof by the trial judge. [690]*690Hall v. State, 2 Ga. App. 437 (58 S. E. 558), and cit.; McGovern v. Trammell, 14 Ga. App. 754 (82 S. E. 318).

Decided January 27, 1920. Petition for certiorari; from Fayette superior court—Judge Searcy. August 29, 1919. W. B. Hollingsivorth, for plaintiff in error. J. W. Culpepper, contra.

(a) An unsanctioned petition not incorporated in the bill of exceptions but specified and sent up as a part of the record is not sufficiently identified by the mere attaching to the bill of exceptions, and following the judge’s certificate, of the paper which purports to be the original petition, or a copy thereof, with the order refusing sanction. Sullivan v. Surrency, 15 Ga. App. 301, 303 (82 S. E. 926); Hollingsworth v. College Park, 17 Ga. App. 372 (86 S. E. 945.)

2. Under the above ruling the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Moore v. Southern Railway Co.
121 S.E. 138 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
102 S.E. 34, 24 Ga. App. 689, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hightower-v-davis-gactapp-1920.