Hunter v. Hinman
This text of 66 S.E. 1039 (Hunter v. Hinman) 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.
Opinion
1. This case is fully controlled by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Dodson Printers’ Supply Co. v. Harris, 114 Ga. 966 (41 S. E. 54); Thurmond v. Groves, 126 Ga. 779 (55 S. E. 915). See also Bass v. Doughty, 5 Ga. App. 458 (63 S. E. 515) ; Acts 1904, pp. 192, 193, § 15.
2. Where the act creating a city court imperatively requires that pleas shall be filed at the first term, a failure of the clerk to docket a case properly filed at the first term, when the defendant is duly served, does not extend the time for filing pleas. Pleas must be filed in the qlerk’s office in accordance with the mandate of the statute, regardless of any failure or neglect of the clerk to docket the case.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
66 S.E. 1039, 7 Ga. App. 387, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 307, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hunter-v-hinman-gactapp-1910.