Lotson v. Housing Authority of Savannah

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lotson v. Housing Authority of Savannah

109 S.E.2d 64, 99 Ga. App. 622, 1959 Ga. App. LEXIS 918

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 26, 1959

Docket37687

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 109 S.E.2d 64 (Lotson v. Housing Authority of Savannah) 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

Lotson v. Housing Authority of Savannah, 109 S.E.2d 64, 99 Ga. App. 622, 1959 Ga. App. LEXIS 918 (Ga. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Quillian, Judge.

Where, in a case on appeal to this court, assigning error alone on the denial of a motion for a new trial, based on the general and six special grounds, all of which depend upon and require a consideration of the evidence, and the purported “brief of evidence” includes motions to rule *623 out evidence,.objections to the evidence, argument on motions and objections, colloquies between counsel and the court and counsel, and other such immaterial matters, consuming almost one-third as much space as the evidence, itself, and which, if pertinent at all for consideration by this court are properly to be confined to appropriate grounds of the motion for a new trial, this court has no alternative but to affirm the, judgment of the trial court overruling the motion for new trial, as no bona fide effort has been made to comply with the requirements of Code (Ann.) §§ 70-313 and 6-813. Anderson v. State, 211 Ga. 768 (88 S. E. 2d 149); Hester Bennett Lumber Co. v. Alexander, 211 Ga. 402 (1) (86 S. E. 2d 222); Williamson v. Yakupian, 211 Ga. 61 (84 S. E. 2d 15); Reese v. Wilder, 94 Ga. App. 49 (93 S. E. 2d 416).

Decided May 26, 1959. Harry P. Anestos, for plaintiffs in error. George C. Heyward, Corish, Alexander, Smith & Shea, Malberry Smith, Jr., contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

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

Quillian, Judge.

Where, in a case on appeal to this court, assigning error alone on the denial of a motion for a new trial, based on the general and six special grounds, all of which depend upon and require a consideration of the evidence, and the purported “brief of evidence” includes motions to rule *623 out evidence,.objections to the evidence, argument on motions and objections, colloquies between counsel and the court and counsel, and other such immaterial matters, consuming almost one-third as much space as the evidence, itself, and which, if pertinent at all for consideration by this court are properly to be confined to appropriate grounds of the motion for a new trial, this court has no alternative but to affirm the, judgment of the trial court overruling the motion for new trial, as no bona fide effort has been made to comply with the requirements of Code (Ann.) §§ 70-313 and 6-813. Anderson v. State, 211 Ga. 768 (88 S. E. 2d 149); Hester Bennett Lumber Co. v. Alexander, 211 Ga. 402 (1) (86 S. E. 2d 222); Williamson v. Yakupian, 211 Ga. 61 (84 S. E. 2d 15); Reese v. Wilder, 94 Ga. App. 49 (93 S. E. 2d 416).

Decided May 26, 1959. Harry P. Anestos, for plaintiffs in error. George C. Heyward, Corish, Alexander, Smith & Shea, Malberry Smith, Jr., contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 S.E.2d 64, 99 Ga. App. 622, 1959 Ga. App. LEXIS 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lotson-v-housing-authority-of-savannah-gactapp-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack