Moore, Marsh & Co. v. Medlock

38 S.E. 825, 113 Ga. 259, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 219
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided April 26, 1901·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. This court will not review the evidence in a case in which it is apparent from the record that there has been no bona fide effort made to brief the evidence as required by law, and when the document purporting to be a brief of the evidence is no brief at all, but a needlessly voluminous paper, abounding in repetition and much totally useless and irrelevant matter. Price v. High, 108 Ga. 145 ; Ansley v. Davidson, 110 Ga. 279; Buchanan v. McClain, 110 Ga. 479; McLeod v. Railroad Co., 111 Ga. 859.

2. Where in such a case no question is presented which can be determined without reference to the evidence, the judgment below must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lewis, J., absent.

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

Moore, Marsh & Co. v. Medlock, 38 S.E. 825, 113 Ga. 259, 1901 Ga. LEXIS 219 (Ga. 1901).

38 S.E. 825 (Moore, Marsh & Co. v. Medlock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Boston Insurance Co. v. Harmon
18 S.E.2d 84 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Jones v. Gate City Lodge No. 54
156 S.E. 672 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)
Culver v. Silver
39 S.E. 472 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)