Mertins v. Gavalos

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Mertins v. Gavalos

111 S.E. 684, 28 Ga. App. 438, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 578

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 11, 1922

Docket13112

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 111 S.E. 684 (Mertins v. Gavalos) 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

Mertins v. Gavalos, 111 S.E. 684, 28 Ga. App. 438, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 578 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

It appearing that the trial magistrate failed to answer the writ of certiorari on the third Monday in May, as directed by the writ issued from the superior court of Richmond county, cr at any time during the term of said court to which it was returnable, and it appearing that no further time for answering was given, and that the plaintiff in certiorari applied for no order granting the trial magistrate additional time in which to answer or requiring him to answer the writ, the judge of the superior court erred in refusing to dismiss the certiorari, upon proper motion of defendant in certiorari so to do. Civil Code (1910), § 5195; Henry v. American Ry. Express Co., 25 Ga. App. 646 (1) (104 S. E. 16); Carroll v. Upchurch, 25 Ga. App. 646 (104 S. E. 16); J. M. High Co. v. Ga. Ry. & Power Co., 12 Ga. App. 505 (77 S. E. 588); Fain v. Shy, 115 Ga. 765 (42 S. E. 94).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

It appearing that the trial magistrate failed to answer the writ of certiorari on the third Monday in May, as directed by the writ issued from the superior court of Richmond county, cr at any time during the term of said court to which it was returnable, and it appearing that no further time for answering was given, and that the plaintiff in certiorari applied for no order granting the trial magistrate additional time in which to answer or requiring him to answer the writ, the judge of the superior court erred in refusing to dismiss the certiorari, upon proper motion of defendant in certiorari so to do. Civil Code (1910), § 5195; Henry v. American Ry. Express Co., 25 Ga. App. 646 (1) (104 S. E. 16); Carroll v. Upchurch, 25 Ga. App. 646 (104 S. E. 16); J. M. High Co. v. Ga. Ry. & Power Co., 12 Ga. App. 505 (77 S. E. 588); Fain v. Shy, 115 Ga. 765 (42 S. E. 94).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 684, 28 Ga. App. 438, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 578, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mertins-v-gavalos-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack