Johnson v. James

91 S.E. 220, 19 Ga. App. 118, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 5
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 23, 1917
Docket7312
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 91 S.E. 220 (Johnson v. James) 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. James, 91 S.E. 220, 19 Ga. App. 118, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 5 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The making of an oral motion for a new trial in the municipal court of Atlanta, as provided for by act of 1913 (Ga. Laws, 1913, p. 145 (a-b)), is a cumulative remedy and does not defeat the right of certiorari.

2. Upon the petition for certiorari and the answer of the judge of the municipal court, the order sustaining the certiorari was demanded.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.

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

Related

City Investment Co. v. Crawley
199 S.E. 747 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1938)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Lovelace
106 S.E. 6 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Planters Fertilizer Co. v. Smith
93 S.E. 1018 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 S.E. 220, 19 Ga. App. 118, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 5, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-james-gactapp-1917.