Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Mauldin v. Mauldin

Mauldin v. Mauldin

45 S.E.2d 818, 203 Ga. 123, 1947 Ga. LEXIS 591
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 1, 1947
Docket16034.
StatusPublished
Cited by30 cases

This text of 45 S.E.2d 818 (Mauldin v. Mauldin) 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
Mauldin v. Mauldin, 45 S.E.2d 818, 203 Ga. 123, 1947 Ga. LEXIS 591 (Ga. 1947).

Opinion

Duckworth, Presiding Justice.

Within ten days after the bill of exceptions has been signed and certified the plaintiff therein must serve a copy thereof upon the opposite party or his counsel with a return of such service or an acknowledgment of service entered upon or annexed to the bill of exceptions. Code, § 6-911. Without such service the Supreme Court has no jurisdiction and the writ of error must be dismissed. Seliger v. Coker, 105 Ga. 512 (31 S. E. 185); Conner v. Flanders, *124 129 Ga. 734 (59 S. E. 771); Johnson v. McKelvin, 150 Ga. 812 (105 S. E. 600); Ham v. Preston, 152 Ga. 244 (109 S. E. 505); Davis v. Gillespie, 180 Ga. 850 (181 S. E. 167); Conaway v. Scott, 194 Ga. 841 (22 S. E. 2d, 806).

No. 16034. December 1, 1947. Robert R. Forrester and Williamson & Crowe, for plaintiff. James H. Pate, for defendant.

(a) The new rale enacted in 1946 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 734), to become a part of Chapter 6 of the Code of 1933, and requiring the trial judge before certifying the bill of exceptions to provide for reasonable notice to the opposite party or his counsel, and thus afford an opportunity to be heard on the question as to whether or not the bill of exceptions as tendered is correct, was not intended to and does not alter or change the above-stated requirement of service after the bill of exceptions has been certified. No entry of service nor an acknowledgment of service appearing upon the present bill of exceptions, this court is without jurisdiction, and the writ of error must be dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, /., who took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Related

Hill v. Starling
135 S.E.2d 338 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)
Sargeant v. Starr
116 S.E.2d 633 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1960)
Tanner v. State
108 S.E.2d 703 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1959)
Lee Merritt Hatchery, Inc. v. Burt
93 S.E.2d 420 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1956)
Barbaree v. Coffin
92 S.E.2d 860 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1956)
Le Blanc v. Jolly
89 S.E.2d 681 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)
Statham v. Saxon
80 S.E.2d 182 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1954)
Barden v. Wender Realty Co.
78 S.E.2d 785 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Conley Housing Corp. v. Coleman
78 S.E.2d 503 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Chitwood v. Chitwood
77 S.E.2d 524 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1953)
Black v. State
74 S.E.2d 896 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Hall Motors Inc. v. Decatur Lincoln Mercury Co.
74 S.E.2d 561 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Jones v. Dinkins
71 S.E.2d 626 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)
Castleberry v. State
68 S.E.2d 604 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Newton v. Bailey
67 S.E.2d 239 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
McGreggor v. W. L. Florence Construction Co.
65 S.E.2d 809 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1951)
Godwin v. Atlantic Steel Co.
61 S.E.2d 155 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1950)
Irwin v. LeCraw
58 S.E.2d 383 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
City of Dalton v. Cochran
55 S.E.2d 907 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1949)
Hendrix v. Toledious
55 S.E.2d 752 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 S.E.2d 818, 203 Ga. 123, 1947 Ga. LEXIS 591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mauldin-v-mauldin-ga-1947.