League v. Churchill

Court of Appeals of Georgia

League v. Churchill

137 S.E. 800, 36 Ga. App. 681, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 249

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 16, 1927·No. 17160·Published

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

Under the answers to the questions certified by this court to the Supreme Court in this ease (164 Ga. 137 S. E. 632), the judge of the superior court did not err in the judgment rendered on the appeal before him in the probate proceedings. The principle of estoppel is not involved.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., eoncur. Wright & Jackson, for plaintiff in error. Callaway & Howard, William H. Fleming, Hamilton Phinizy, James S. Bussey Jr., contra.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

Under the answers to the questions certified by this court to the Supreme Court in this ease (164 Ga. 137 S. E. 632), the judge of the superior court did not err in the judgment rendered on the appeal before him in the probate proceedings. The principle of estoppel is not involved.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., eoncur. Wright & Jackson, for plaintiff in error. Callaway & Howard, William H. Fleming, Hamilton Phinizy, James S. Bussey Jr., contra.

League v. Churchill, 137 S.E. 800, 36 Ga. App. 681, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 249 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

137 S.E. 800 (League v. Churchill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related