ITT INDUSTRIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. Carpet Factory, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

ITT INDUSTRIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. Carpet Factory, Inc.

230 S.E.2d 354, 140 Ga. App. 204, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1408

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 26, 1976

Docket52696

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 230 S.E.2d 354 (ITT INDUSTRIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. Carpet Factory, Inc.) 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

ITT INDUSTRIAL CREDIT COMPANY v. Carpet Factory, Inc., 230 S.E.2d 354, 140 Ga. App. 204, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1408 (Ga. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, Chief Judge.

In dismissing this appeal the trial court found that the delay in transmitting the record to this court was inexcusable but did not make a finding that the delay was unreasonable. The Supreme Court held in Young v. *205 Climatrol &c. Corp., 237 Ga. 53 (226 SE2d 737) that the provision of the Appellate Practice Act authorizing the trial court to dismiss an appeal for delay (Code Ann. § 6-809 (b)), requires that two elements be present: One, that the delay was unreasonable and two, that it was inexcusable. Since no finding of unreasonableness was made, Young controls here and the judgment dismissing the appeal is reversed.

Argued September 22, 1976 Decided October 26, 1976. Lewis N. Jones, for appellant. Watson, Brown, Foster & Keller, John L. Watson, Jr., for appellees.

Judgment reversed.

Clark and Stolz, JJ., concur.

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

Bell, Chief Judge.

In dismissing this appeal the trial court found that the delay in transmitting the record to this court was inexcusable but did not make a finding that the delay was unreasonable. The Supreme Court held in Young v. *205 Climatrol &c. Corp., 237 Ga. 53 (226 SE2d 737) that the provision of the Appellate Practice Act authorizing the trial court to dismiss an appeal for delay (Code Ann. § 6-809 (b)), requires that two elements be present: One, that the delay was unreasonable and two, that it was inexcusable. Since no finding of unreasonableness was made, Young controls here and the judgment dismissing the appeal is reversed.

Argued September 22, 1976 Decided October 26, 1976. Lewis N. Jones, for appellant. Watson, Brown, Foster & Keller, John L. Watson, Jr., for appellees.

Judgment reversed.

Clark and Stolz, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 S.E.2d 354, 140 Ga. App. 204, 1976 Ga. App. LEXIS 1408, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/itt-industrial-credit-company-v-carpet-factory-inc-gactapp-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack