Jones v. Middle Georgia Cotton Mills

Supreme Court of Georgia

Jones v. Middle Georgia Cotton Mills

61 S.E. 977, 131 Ga. 52, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 14

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 15, 1908

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 61 S.E. 977 (Jones v. Middle Georgia Cotton Mills) 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.

Bluebook

Jones v. Middle Georgia Cotton Mills, 61 S.E. 977, 131 Ga. 52, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 14 (Ga. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. This court will not consider as evidence affidavits and documents specified in a bill of exceptions as material to a clear understanding of the errors complained of, but which are not incorporated in the bill of exceptions or made 'a part thereof, nor incorporated in an approved brief of evidence, but are brought to this court in a transcript of record merely as independent papers under the certificate of the clerk that they are filed in his office. Roberts v. Heinsohn, 123 Ga. 685 (51 S. E. 589).

2. The evidence introduced in the court below, not being properly before this court, can not be considered. The answer having denied the material allegations of fact contained in the petition, upon which the prayer for injunction and receiver was based, we can not hold that there was error in refusing to grant the relief prayed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices ooneur.

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

Atkinson, J.

1. This court will not consider as evidence affidavits and documents specified in a bill of exceptions as material to a clear understanding of the errors complained of, but which are not incorporated in the bill of exceptions or made 'a part thereof, nor incorporated in an approved brief of evidence, but are brought to this court in a transcript of record merely as independent papers under the certificate of the clerk that they are filed in his office. Roberts v. Heinsohn, 123 Ga. 685 (51 S. E. 589).

2. The evidence introduced in the court below, not being properly before this court, can not be considered. The answer having denied the material allegations of fact contained in the petition, upon which the prayer for injunction and receiver was based, we can not hold that there was error in refusing to grant the relief prayed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices ooneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 S.E. 977, 131 Ga. 52, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 14, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-middle-georgia-cotton-mills-ga-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack