Holloway v. Poppell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Holloway v. Poppell

152 S.E.2d 4, 114 Ga. App. 531, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 834

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 28, 1966

Docket42323

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 152 S.E.2d 4 (Holloway v. Poppell) 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

Holloway v. Poppell, 152 S.E.2d 4, 114 Ga. App. 531, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 834 (Ga. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Felton, Chief Judge.

A valid filing of a transcript of evidence prepared from recollection requires the agreement of the parties or their counsel thereon, or, in case of the inability of the parties to agree as to the correctness of such transcript, either the decision of the trial judge thereon or, if he is unable to recall what “transpired,” an order so stating. Code Ann. § 6-805 (g) (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 24). The transcript of evidence prepared from recollection and filed in the trial court by appellants meets none of the above requirements, being signed only by counsel for appellants. A determination *532 of the question presented in this appeal from the judgment on the direction of the verdict involves necessarily a consideration of the evidence; and where the evidence is not properly brought up all questions requiring a consideration of evidence will be resolved in favor of the judgment, and it will be affirmed. Giles v. Peachtree Pantries, 209 Ga. 536 (74 SE2d 545) and cit.; Clark v. State, 219 Ga. 680, 683 (2) (135 SE2d 270) and cit.; State Hwy. Dept. v. Attaway, 97 Ga. App. 140 (1) (102 SE2d 514) and cit. Therefore, since no approved transcript is in this record we are required to affirm the judgment in favor of the defendant-appellee.

Submitted September 9, 1966 Decided October 28, 1966. Albert E. Butler, for appellants. Thomas & Howard, W. Dan Roberts, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Frankum and Parnell, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, Chief Judge.

A valid filing of a transcript of evidence prepared from recollection requires the agreement of the parties or their counsel thereon, or, in case of the inability of the parties to agree as to the correctness of such transcript, either the decision of the trial judge thereon or, if he is unable to recall what “transpired,” an order so stating. Code Ann. § 6-805 (g) (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 24). The transcript of evidence prepared from recollection and filed in the trial court by appellants meets none of the above requirements, being signed only by counsel for appellants. A determination *532 of the question presented in this appeal from the judgment on the direction of the verdict involves necessarily a consideration of the evidence; and where the evidence is not properly brought up all questions requiring a consideration of evidence will be resolved in favor of the judgment, and it will be affirmed. Giles v. Peachtree Pantries, 209 Ga. 536 (74 SE2d 545) and cit.; Clark v. State, 219 Ga. 680, 683 (2) (135 SE2d 270) and cit.; State Hwy. Dept. v. Attaway, 97 Ga. App. 140 (1) (102 SE2d 514) and cit. Therefore, since no approved transcript is in this record we are required to affirm the judgment in favor of the defendant-appellee.

Submitted September 9, 1966 Decided October 28, 1966. Albert E. Butler, for appellants. Thomas & Howard, W. Dan Roberts, for appellee.

Judgment affirmed.

Frankum and Parnell, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 S.E.2d 4, 114 Ga. App. 531, 1966 Ga. App. LEXIS 834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holloway-v-poppell-gactapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack