Irwin v. LeCraw

Supreme Court of Georgia

Irwin v. LeCraw

58 S.E.2d 383, 206 Ga. 702, 1950 Ga. LEXIS 547

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 14, 1950

Docket17009

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 58 S.E.2d 383 (Irwin v. LeCraw) 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.

Bluebook

Irwin v. LeCraw, 58 S.E.2d 383, 206 Ga. 702, 1950 Ga. LEXIS 547 (Ga. 1950).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

Within ten days after the bill of exceptions has been signed and certified, the plaintiff therein must serve a copy thereof upon the opposite party or his counsel, with a return of such service or an acknowledgment of service entered upon or annexed to the bill of exceptions, in order to give this court jurisdiction. Code i 6-911; Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Moon, 80 Ga. 365 (10 S. E. 111); Inman, Smith & Co. v. Estes, 104 Ga. 645 (30 S. E. 800); Papworth v. Ryman, 108 Ga. 780 (33 S. E. 665); Izlar v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 162 Ga. 558 (134 S. E. 315); Warnock v. Woodward, 183 Ga. 367 (188 S. E. 336); South Side Atlanta Bank v. Anderson, 200 Ga. 322 (37 S. E. 2d, 404); Mauldin v. Mauldin, 203 Ga. 123 (45 S. E. 2d, 818). It appearing that there was no such service of the bill of exceptions on, nor legal waiver or acknowledgment of service by, one of the defendants in error, this was a fatal defect, and the motion to dismiss must be sustained.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Almand, J., who is disqualified.

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

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

Within ten days after the bill of exceptions has been signed and certified, the plaintiff therein must serve a copy thereof upon the opposite party or his counsel, with a return of such service or an acknowledgment of service entered upon or annexed to the bill of exceptions, in order to give this court jurisdiction. Code i 6-911; Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Moon, 80 Ga. 365 (10 S. E. 111); Inman, Smith & Co. v. Estes, 104 Ga. 645 (30 S. E. 800); Papworth v. Ryman, 108 Ga. 780 (33 S. E. 665); Izlar v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 162 Ga. 558 (134 S. E. 315); Warnock v. Woodward, 183 Ga. 367 (188 S. E. 336); South Side Atlanta Bank v. Anderson, 200 Ga. 322 (37 S. E. 2d, 404); Mauldin v. Mauldin, 203 Ga. 123 (45 S. E. 2d, 818). It appearing that there was no such service of the bill of exceptions on, nor legal waiver or acknowledgment of service by, one of the defendants in error, this was a fatal defect, and the motion to dismiss must be sustained.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Almand, J., who is disqualified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

58 S.E.2d 383, 206 Ga. 702, 1950 Ga. LEXIS 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/irwin-v-lecraw-ga-1950.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack