Hill v. Jackson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hill v. Jackson

250 S.E.2d 7, 147 Ga. App. 704, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2910

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 5, 1978

Docket56415

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 250 S.E.2d 7 (Hill v. Jackson) 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

Hill v. Jackson, 250 S.E.2d 7, 147 Ga. App. 704, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2910 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Smith, Judge.

Hill andDunson, appellants, contend the trial court erred in denying their "motion to strike the default from the trial docket and all other court documents.” We affirm.

Notwithstanding appellants’ characterization of the factual posture of this case, the only evidence in the record as to what happened below is found in the trial court’s statement of facts in its order overruling the motion. When the case was called for trial, neither the appellants nor their attorney was present, although the case was set down on the trial calendar and they were notified. An [705]*705individual identified as a paralegal assistant for the attorney did appear,¹ to state that the attorney was ill; however, the showing required by Code § 81-1413 (continuance based on attorney’s illness) was not made. Nor is there any indication of any showing made under Code § 81-1412 (continuance based on absence of party). The case was tried before a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered in the amount prayed for. Under the above circumstances, the trial court’s denial of the motion for continuance was unquestionably within its discretion. McLendon v. State, 123 Ga. App. 290 (2) (180 SE2d 567) (1971). It was then proper to submit the case to trial, and the judgment rendered has not been attacked on any valid grounds.

Argued September 12, 1978 Decided October 5, 1978 Rehearing denied October 25, 1978 Paul T. Robinson, Henrietta Turnquest, for appellants. James E. Weldon, H. J. Thomas, Jr., for appellee.

Whether the trial court erred in allegedly marking the case "in default” and in refusing to strike such notation is not properly before us, there being no evidence of such action in the record.

Judgment affirmed.

Been, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

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

Smith, Judge.

Hill andDunson, appellants, contend the trial court erred in denying their "motion to strike the default from the trial docket and all other court documents.” We affirm.

Notwithstanding appellants’ characterization of the factual posture of this case, the only evidence in the record as to what happened below is found in the trial court’s statement of facts in its order overruling the motion. When the case was called for trial, neither the appellants nor their attorney was present, although the case was set down on the trial calendar and they were notified. An [705]*705individual identified as a paralegal assistant for the attorney did appear,¹ to state that the attorney was ill; however, the showing required by Code § 81-1413 (continuance based on attorney’s illness) was not made. Nor is there any indication of any showing made under Code § 81-1412 (continuance based on absence of party). The case was tried before a jury, and verdict and judgment were rendered in the amount prayed for. Under the above circumstances, the trial court’s denial of the motion for continuance was unquestionably within its discretion. McLendon v. State, 123 Ga. App. 290 (2) (180 SE2d 567) (1971). It was then proper to submit the case to trial, and the judgment rendered has not been attacked on any valid grounds.

Argued September 12, 1978 Decided October 5, 1978 Rehearing denied October 25, 1978 Paul T. Robinson, Henrietta Turnquest, for appellants. James E. Weldon, H. J. Thomas, Jr., for appellee.

Whether the trial court erred in allegedly marking the case "in default” and in refusing to strike such notation is not properly before us, there being no evidence of such action in the record.

Judgment affirmed.

Been, P. J., and Banke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 S.E.2d 7, 147 Ga. App. 704, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-jackson-gactapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack