Manning v. Mayor of Gainesville

53 S.E. 1002, 125 Ga. 239, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 107
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 10, 1906
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 53 S.E. 1002 (Manning v. Mayor of Gainesville) 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
Manning v. Mayor of Gainesville, 53 S.E. 1002, 125 Ga. 239, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 107 (Ga. 1906).

Opinion

XjUmpkin, J.

1. Where a petition for certiorari alleged, that a trial was had before the mayor and council of the City of Gainesville upon a charge of violating certain ordinances of the city, that evidence was introduced which was set out in the petition, that the defendant was found guilty and sentenced to pay a fine of $100, and assigned error on such judgment; and where the answer of the mayor and council to the writ •of certiorari verified none of the allegations of the petition except that the evidence set out in the petition was practically correct, and no exception was taken so as to require them to answer more fully (or.trasverse, had it been a proper ease therefor), this court can not reverse a judgment of the judge of the superior court overruling the certiorari. Simpson v. McBride, 78 Ga. 297; Gartrell v. Linn, 79 Ga. 700; Knowles v. Coachman, 109 Ga. 356; Childs v. Moran, 114 Ga. 320; Buckner v. State, 115 Ga. 238; Stoner v. Magins, 116 Ga. 797; Garrett v. McIntosh, 116 Ga. 911; Colbert v. State, 118 Ga. 302; Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Potter, 120 Ga. 343; Stephens v. Mayor and Council of Macon, 120 Ga. 482; Akers v. High Co., 122 Ga. 279; Jessey v. Dean, 122 Ga. 371; Little v. Mayor and Council of Fort Valley, 123 Ga. 503; Williams v. Bradfield, 124 Ga. 1003; Cooper v. Gainesville, Brown v. Gainesville, McCleskey v. Gainesville, ante, 238.

2. The point indicated in the preceding note having been urged by counsel for the defendant in error, under the numerous decisions cited above, the judgment must be affirmed.

3. This court is asked to review and overrule this entire line of decisions, • but declines to do so. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Griffin
115 S.E. 276 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Moore v. Coleman
111 S.E. 579 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Ratcliff v. Smith
58 S.E. 518 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Rodgers v. State
58 S.E. 416 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Southern Railway Co. v. Chestnut Mountain Merchandise Co.
58 S.E. 247 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Evans v. Mayor of Forsyth
55 S.E. 490 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1906)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 S.E. 1002, 125 Ga. 239, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manning-v-mayor-of-gainesville-ga-1906.