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

18 S.E. 294, 92 Ga. 332
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJuly 26, 1893
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 18 S.E. 294 (Joseph v. East Tenn., Va. & Ga. 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.

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

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]*333the 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

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)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
18 S.E. 294, 92 Ga. 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-v-east-tenn-va-ga-railway-co-ga-1893.