Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Johnson v. Estate of Farkas

Johnson v. Estate of Farkas

96 S.E. 392, 22 Ga. App. 539, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 592
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJuly 30, 1918
Docket9442
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 96 S.E. 392 (Johnson v. Estate of Farkas) 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
Johnson v. Estate of Farkas, 96 S.E. 392, 22 Ga. App. 539, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 592 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

A party defendant in error is essential to the prosecution of a writ of error, and where no one is named or otherwise disclosed by the bill of exceptions as defendant in error, the writ must necessarily be dismissed; for without a defendant in error there is no case. Ray v. Pease, 112 Ga. 675 (37 S. E. 875); Branch v. Mallory, 8 Ga. App. 797 (70 S. E. 177); Hendricks v. Rogers, 22 Ga. App. 357 (95 S. E. 1009); Knox v. Greenfield Estate, 7 Ga. App. 305 (66 S. E. 805).

Writ of error dismissed.

Wade, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Related

Williamson v. Marchman
134 S.E. 625 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1926)
Kenney v. Walden
113 S.E. 61 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Farkas
107 S.E. 610 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
96 S.E. 392, 22 Ga. App. 539, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 592, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-estate-of-farkas-gactapp-1918.