Joseph v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co.

18 S.E. 294, 92 Ga. 332
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 26, 1893·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Bleckley, Chief Justice.

It was the duty of counsel to tender to the judge a correct bill of exceptions within thirty days after the adjournment of court. In this instance no such bill of exceptions was tendered until more than four months after adjournment. What transpired in the meantime is indicated in the first head-note. We think the delay was inexcusable and unreasonable. The second headnote sets forth what we deem a proper construction of [333] the act of November 11th, 1889, with reference to the judge’s duty in altering bills of exception when found to be incorrect. The motion to dismiss must prevail.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Joseph v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co., 18 S.E. 294, 92 Ga. 332 (Ga. 1893).

18 S.E. 294 (Joseph v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

White v. Griggs
104 S.E.2d 890 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1958)
Wilkes v. Aderhold
44 S.E.2d 248 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Walker v. Wood
46 S.E. 869 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Parkman v. Dent
34 S.E. 559 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1899)
Hawkins v. Mayor of Americus
30 S.E. 519 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Allison & Davis v. Jowers
21 S.E. 570 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)