Jackson v. McCracken

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Jackson v. McCracken

72 S.E. 67, 9 Ga. App. 668, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 290

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 11, 1911

Docket3108

StatusPublished

This text of 72 S.E. 67 (Jackson v. McCracken) 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

Jackson v. McCracken, 72 S.E. 67, 9 Ga. App. 668, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 290 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. Though a summons issued- by a justice of the peace names a number of defendants, only such as are served, or voluntarily appear and plead, become parties to the case. In the case at bar, though the summons designated more than one defendant, it affirmatively appears that only one appeared and pleaded, and there is- no evidence that the others were served. The verdict is in terms a finding as between the defendant who appeared and the plaintiff. The court did not err in refusing to dismiss the certiorari brought by the plaintiff, on the ground that the bond was payable only to the defendant in whose favor the verdict was rendered, and not also in favor of the other defendants named in the summons. For a similar reason, failure to serve the other persons with notice of the sanction of the certiorari was not cause for a dismissal of the certiorari.

2. The judge of the superior court did not err in granting a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Powell, J.

1. Though a summons issued- by a justice of the peace names a number of defendants, only such as are served, or voluntarily appear and plead, become parties to the case. In the case at bar, though the summons designated more than one defendant, it affirmatively appears that only one appeared and pleaded, and there is- no evidence that the others were served. The verdict is in terms a finding as between the defendant who appeared and the plaintiff. The court did not err in refusing to dismiss the certiorari brought by the plaintiff, on the ground that the bond was payable only to the defendant in whose favor the verdict was rendered, and not also in favor of the other defendants named in the summons. For a similar reason, failure to serve the other persons with notice of the sanction of the certiorari was not cause for a dismissal of the certiorari.

2. The judge of the superior court did not err in granting a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 S.E. 67, 9 Ga. App. 668, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-mccracken-gactapp-1911.