Lee v. Newton

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lee v. Newton

136 S.E. 103, 36 Ga. App. 254, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 901

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 20, 1926

Docket17398

StatusPublished

This text of 136 S.E. 103 (Lee v. Newton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lee v. Newton, 136 S.E. 103, 36 Ga. App. 254, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 901 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

The defendant in the trial court, being a resident of the State of Georgia, in which the suit was brought, had no right to remove the case to the United States court upon the ground of diversity of citizenship of the parties. Lee v. Wilmington Savings Bank, 29 Ga. App. 306 (114 S. E. 918). The defendant’s petition for removal was there- . fore properly denied.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur. Robert Lee, for plaintiff in error. Reuben M. Tuck, contra.

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

Stephens, J.

The defendant in the trial court, being a resident of the State of Georgia, in which the suit was brought, had no right to remove the case to the United States court upon the ground of diversity of citizenship of the parties. Lee v. Wilmington Savings Bank, 29 Ga. App. 306 (114 S. E. 918). The defendant’s petition for removal was there- . fore properly denied.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur. Robert Lee, for plaintiff in error. Reuben M. Tuck, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

136 S.E. 103, 36 Ga. App. 254, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 901, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-newton-gactapp-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack