Lumpkin v. Respess

Supreme Court of Georgia

Lumpkin v. Respess

68 Ga. 822

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 15, 1882

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 68 Ga. 822 (Lumpkin v. Respess) 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

Lumpkin v. Respess, 68 Ga. 822 (Ga. 1882).

Pincite

Opinion

■i. The verdict is supported by the evidence.

2. A continuance was properly refused on the ground that a material witness was absent, when there was no evidence of his having been subpoenaed.

3. A new and distinct party cannot be added to a suit by amendment. Code, §3480.

4. Where a party to a suit has ample opportunity to inform the court of his sickness and obtain a continuance, after verdict in his absence, a new trial will not be granted cn the ground that he was sick, and — not expecting the case to be tried — did not send any affidavit of his sickness 51 Ga., 241; 53 Ib., 149; 54 Ib., 660; 59 Ib., 83.

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

■i. The verdict is supported by the evidence.

2. A continuance was properly refused on the ground that a material witness was absent, when there was no evidence of his having been subpoenaed.

3. A new and distinct party cannot be added to a suit by amendment. Code, §3480.

4. Where a party to a suit has ample opportunity to inform the court of his sickness and obtain a continuance, after verdict in his absence, a new trial will not be granted cn the ground that he was sick, and — not expecting the case to be tried — did not send any affidavit of his sickness 51 Ga., 241; 53 Ib., 149; 54 Ib., 660; 59 Ib., 83.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 Ga. 822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lumpkin-v-respess-ga-1882.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack