Hutchings v. Roquemore
This text of 139 S.E. 216 (Hutchings v. Roquemore) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
The Supreme Court will not undertake to review the constitutionality of an aet of the General Assembly, raised for the first time in the bill of exceptions. In the instant ease the judgment of the municipal court of Macon was sought to be reviewed by petition for certiorari presented to the judge of the superior court, which the latter declined to sanction. In the petition for certiorari the constitutionality of the act of 1925 (Acts 1925, p. 463) regulating the practice as to ap[638]*638peals in that court was not questioned or attacked. Consequently the unconstitutionality of said act now sought to be assailed in this court was not before the judge of the superior court for consideration or adjudication. Judgment affirmed.
[637]*637Appeal and Error, 3 C. J. p. 710, n. 73.
Certiorari, 11 C. J. p. 149, n. 12; p. 218, n. 81; p. 219, n. 84.
Courts, 15 C. J. p. 1039, n. 52.
Evidence, 22 C. J. p. 148, n. 67.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
139 S.E. 216, 164 Ga. 637, 1927 Ga. LEXIS 239, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hutchings-v-roquemore-ga-1927.