Kirby v. Woods

Supreme Court of Georgia

Kirby v. Woods

90 S.E.2d 4, 212 Ga. 20, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 525

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 11, 1955

Docket19051

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 90 S.E.2d 4 (Kirby v. Woods) 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

Kirby v. Woods, 90 S.E.2d 4, 212 Ga. 20, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 525 (Ga. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Head, Justice.

1. “It is the duty of this court, with or without motion, to inquire into its jurisdiction, and to dismiss a writ of error where jurisdiction is lacking.” Stewart v. Stewart, 208 Ga. 83, 84 (1) (65 S. E. 2d 151); Chandler v. Foote & Davies Co., 210 Ga. 370 (80 S. E. 2d 292).

2. “All parties who are interested in sustaining the judgment of the court below, or who would be affected by a judgment of reversal, are indispensable parties in the Supreme Court and must be made parties to the bill of exceptions, or the writ of error will be dismissed.” Emanuel Farm Co. v. Batts, 176 Ga. 552 (1) (168 S. E. 316); Malsby v. Shipp, 177 Ga. 54 (169 S. E. 308); Stewart v. Stewart, supra.

3. In the present case, an action for partitioning and equitable relief, A. N. Woods, David Woods, Buck Ricks, and Bessie Ricks were named as defendants. The general demurrer of Buck Ricks and Bessie Ricks to the petition was sustained, and the exception is to that judgment. Service of the bill of exceptions was acknowledged by counsel as “attorneys for Buck Ricks and Bessie Ricks.” There is no entry of service of the bill of exceptions on A. N. Woods and David Woods, nor is there any acknowledgment of service by them, or by counsel for them. The petition recites that A. N. Woods is a resident of the State of Florida, his address being Route 5, Box 1460, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. As to this defendant it does not appear that he was not represented by counsel, but if not represented by counsel, there is no service of the bill of exceptions upon this defendant pursuant to the provisions of Code § 6-914. See Jordan v. Harber, 172 Ga. 139, 153 (157 S. E. 652). There being no service on, or waiver of service by, two essential parties in the court below, this court is without jurisdiction, and the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

All the Justices concur. *21 David H. Fritts, H. Reginald Thompson, for plaintiffs in error. Rountree & Rountree, contra.

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

Head, Justice.

1. “It is the duty of this court, with or without motion, to inquire into its jurisdiction, and to dismiss a writ of error where jurisdiction is lacking.” Stewart v. Stewart, 208 Ga. 83, 84 (1) (65 S. E. 2d 151); Chandler v. Foote & Davies Co., 210 Ga. 370 (80 S. E. 2d 292).

2. “All parties who are interested in sustaining the judgment of the court below, or who would be affected by a judgment of reversal, are indispensable parties in the Supreme Court and must be made parties to the bill of exceptions, or the writ of error will be dismissed.” Emanuel Farm Co. v. Batts, 176 Ga. 552 (1) (168 S. E. 316); Malsby v. Shipp, 177 Ga. 54 (169 S. E. 308); Stewart v. Stewart, supra.

3. In the present case, an action for partitioning and equitable relief, A. N. Woods, David Woods, Buck Ricks, and Bessie Ricks were named as defendants. The general demurrer of Buck Ricks and Bessie Ricks to the petition was sustained, and the exception is to that judgment. Service of the bill of exceptions was acknowledged by counsel as “attorneys for Buck Ricks and Bessie Ricks.” There is no entry of service of the bill of exceptions on A. N. Woods and David Woods, nor is there any acknowledgment of service by them, or by counsel for them. The petition recites that A. N. Woods is a resident of the State of Florida, his address being Route 5, Box 1460, Fort Lauderdale, Florida. As to this defendant it does not appear that he was not represented by counsel, but if not represented by counsel, there is no service of the bill of exceptions upon this defendant pursuant to the provisions of Code § 6-914. See Jordan v. Harber, 172 Ga. 139, 153 (157 S. E. 652). There being no service on, or waiver of service by, two essential parties in the court below, this court is without jurisdiction, and the writ of error must be

Dismissed.

All the Justices concur. *21 David H. Fritts, H. Reginald Thompson, for plaintiffs in error. Rountree & Rountree, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

90 S.E.2d 4, 212 Ga. 20, 1955 Ga. LEXIS 525, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirby-v-woods-ga-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack