Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/In re Hartsfield

In re Hartsfield

79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 451, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 194
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 17, 1913
Docket4911
StatusPublished

This text of 79 S.E. 225 (In re Hartsfield) 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
In re Hartsfield, 79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 451, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 194 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Opinion

Hita, C. J.

Under the facts in this record, the imposing of a fine upon the plaintiff in error by the trial judge, with an alternative of ten days’ imprisonment, for'alleged contempt of court, was an abuse of discretion; yet, the i fine having been paid to avoid the alternative sentence of imprisonment, the writ of error as to this judgment can not be entertained. The case is Controlled by the ease of White v. Tifton, 1 Ga. App. 569 (57 S. E. 1038), and citations. Writ of error dismissed.

Complaint; from city court of Bainbridgé — Judge Spooner! April 5, 1913. Erie M. Donalson, T. 8. Hawes, for plaintiff. M. E. O’Neal, solicitor, contra.

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

Related

White v. City of Tifton
57 S.E. 1038 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
79 S.E. 225, 13 Ga. App. 451, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 194, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-hartsfield-gactapp-1913.