Lanier v. Gay

Supreme Court of Georgia

Lanier v. Gay

28 S.E.2d 579, 197 Ga. 187, 1944 Ga. LEXIS 232

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 6, 1944

Docket14707.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 28 S.E.2d 579 (Lanier v. Gay) 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

Lanier v. Gay, 28 S.E.2d 579, 197 Ga. 187, 1944 Ga. LEXIS 232 (Ga. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

Atkinson, Justice.

Where, under the pleadings and the evidence in a proceeding for partition of land, a judgment is rendered upon which two or more possible assignments of error may be made, such as that it was contrary to law for stated reasons, or that it was contrary to the evidence, or that the judge should have caused the issue to be tried by a jury, a general assignment that the judgment was error as being “contrary to law,” is too indefinite to raise any question for decision. Cates v. Duncan, 180 Ga. 289 (179 S. E. 121) ; Greenfield v. Harvey, 191 Ga. 92 (11 S. E. 2d, 776) ; Carpenter v. State, 194 Ga. 395 (3) (21 S. E. 2d, 643). Applying the foregoing principle to the instant case, the writ of error must be dismissed, because the sole assignment of error in the bill of exceptions is too general to present any question for decision by the Supreme Court.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Jenkins, P. J., absent on account of illness.

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

Atkinson, Justice.

Where, under the pleadings and the evidence in a proceeding for partition of land, a judgment is rendered upon which two or more possible assignments of error may be made, such as that it was contrary to law for stated reasons, or that it was contrary to the evidence, or that the judge should have caused the issue to be tried by a jury, a general assignment that the judgment was error as being “contrary to law,” is too indefinite to raise any question for decision. Cates v. Duncan, 180 Ga. 289 (179 S. E. 121) ; Greenfield v. Harvey, 191 Ga. 92 (11 S. E. 2d, 776) ; Carpenter v. State, 194 Ga. 395 (3) (21 S. E. 2d, 643). Applying the foregoing principle to the instant case, the writ of error must be dismissed, because the sole assignment of error in the bill of exceptions is too general to present any question for decision by the Supreme Court.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Jenkins, P. J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 S.E.2d 579, 197 Ga. 187, 1944 Ga. LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lanier-v-gay-ga-1944.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack