Lively v. THOMPSON

Supreme Court of Georgia

Lively v. THOMPSON

73 S.E.2d 90, 209 Ga. 425, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 510

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 13, 1952

Docket18026

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 73 S.E.2d 90 (Lively v. THOMPSON) 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

Lively v. THOMPSON, 73 S.E.2d 90, 209 Ga. 425, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 510 (Ga. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

Hawkins, Justice.

A writ of error will not lie to the Supreme Court to correct a judgment of the superior court where, on the trial of the case, “It was stipulated and agreed by and between counsel for the parties that neither party requires proof of title on the part of the other party, and that the issue in the case is the correct location of the dividing line between the property of the plaintiff and the property of the defendants, and if the plaintiff should prevail, the additional question of damages” for cutting shade trees and making excavations on property alleged to belong to the plaintiff, since the Court of Appeals, and not this court, has jurisdiction. Frey v. Thompson, 147 Ga. 559 (94 S. E. 999); Johnson v. Woodward Lumber Co., 202 Ga. 288 (42 S. E. 2d, 639); Ledford v. Hill, 206 Ga. 304 (57 S. E. 2d, 77); Miller v. Ray, 208 Ga. 27 (64 S. E. 2d, 449); Whaley v. Ellis, 209 Ga. 147 (71 S. E. 2d, 209).

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur.

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

Hawkins, Justice.

A writ of error will not lie to the Supreme Court to correct a judgment of the superior court where, on the trial of the case, “It was stipulated and agreed by and between counsel for the parties that neither party requires proof of title on the part of the other party, and that the issue in the case is the correct location of the dividing line between the property of the plaintiff and the property of the defendants, and if the plaintiff should prevail, the additional question of damages” for cutting shade trees and making excavations on property alleged to belong to the plaintiff, since the Court of Appeals, and not this court, has jurisdiction. Frey v. Thompson, 147 Ga. 559 (94 S. E. 999); Johnson v. Woodward Lumber Co., 202 Ga. 288 (42 S. E. 2d, 639); Ledford v. Hill, 206 Ga. 304 (57 S. E. 2d, 77); Miller v. Ray, 208 Ga. 27 (64 S. E. 2d, 449); Whaley v. Ellis, 209 Ga. 147 (71 S. E. 2d, 209).

Transferred to the Court of Appeals.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 S.E.2d 90, 209 Ga. 425, 1952 Ga. LEXIS 510, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lively-v-thompson-ga-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack