Johnson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.
This text of 45 S.E. 988 (Johnson v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.) 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.
Opinion
In the decisions in City of Atlanta v. Wilson, 70 Ga. 714, Stirk v. Central R. Co., 79 Ga. 497, Langston v. Marks, 68 Ga. 436, and Sweeney v. Malloy, 107 Ga. 80, construing the Civil Code, § 5043, it was held that the payment of costs was a condition precedent to the right to maintain a suit which had previously been dismissed or nonsuited, and that there was no [186]*186provision of law for recommencing an action by filing a pauper affidavit. If, therefore, the case is to be determined according to the law of force when the suit was originally nonsuited, the plea in abatement filed at the first term was properly sustained. If it be governed by the provisions of the act of December 18, 1901, the same result follows, since the plaintiff did not, at the time of instituting the second suit, file the affidavit required by that statute. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
45 S.E. 988, 119 Ga. 185, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 83, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-central-of-georgia-railway-co-ga-1903.