Holloman v. City of Tifton

59 S.E. 828, 3 Ga. App. 293, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 621
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided December 20, 1907·No. 748·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Powell, J.

[294] If the allegations be true, the judgment of conviction was erroneous, and subject to be set aside on certiorari; but it was not void. The court had jurisdiction to try for the offense charged, and there being no exception regularly taken to the judgment rendered, the defendant was concluded by it as to his guilt of the offense charged. There are many other reasons why a suit of this character can not be maintained, but, in the light of the one given, others would be superfluous. Judgment affirmed.

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

Holloman v. City of Tifton, 59 S.E. 828, 3 Ga. App. 293, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 621 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

59 S.E. 828 (Holloman v. City of Tifton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Guarantee Trust Life Insurance v. Hill
82 S.E.2d 885 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Moreland v. Kilgore
64 S.E.2d 295 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Greene v. Orr
44 S.E.2d 273 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Eagle, Star & British Dominions Insurance v. Heller
140 S.E. 314 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1927)
Walker v. Crummey
89 S.E. 539 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)