Martin v. Georgia Casualty Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Martin v. Georgia Casualty Co.

123 S.E. 732, 32 Ga. App. 453, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 459

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 16, 1924

Docket14084

StatusPublished

This text of 123 S.E. 732 (Martin v. Georgia Casualty Co.) 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

Martin v. Georgia Casualty Co., 123 S.E. 732, 32 Ga. App. 453, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 459 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

The judgment of this court reversing the superior court upon the general grounds (30 Ga. App. 712, 119 S. E. 337), having been reversed and held erroneous upon certiorari by the Supreme Court (157 Ga. 909, 122 S. E. 881), the judgment of reversal originally ren[454]*454deved by this court must necessarily be vacated, and that part of the opinion of this court upon which the reversal is predicated must therefore be withdrawn. Since the record presents no other assignment of error for this court’s consideration, the judgment of the superior court must necessarily be affirmed.

Decided June 16, 1924. Roger D. Flynt, Ira N. Eubanks, for plaintiff. Brock, Sparks & Russell, J. E. Burch, for defendants.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

The judgment of this court reversing the superior court upon the general grounds (30 Ga. App. 712, 119 S. E. 337), having been reversed and held erroneous upon certiorari by the Supreme Court (157 Ga. 909, 122 S. E. 881), the judgment of reversal originally ren[454]*454deved by this court must necessarily be vacated, and that part of the opinion of this court upon which the reversal is predicated must therefore be withdrawn. Since the record presents no other assignment of error for this court’s consideration, the judgment of the superior court must necessarily be affirmed.

Decided June 16, 1924. Roger D. Flynt, Ira N. Eubanks, for plaintiff. Brock, Sparks & Russell, J. E. Burch, for defendants.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 S.E. 732, 32 Ga. App. 453, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 459, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-georgia-casualty-co-gactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack