Moore v. Coleman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Moore v. Coleman

111 S.E. 579, 28 Ga. App. 427, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 567

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 1, 1922

Docket12814

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 111 S.E. 579 (Moore v. Coleman) 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

Moore v. Coleman, 111 S.E. 579, 28 Ga. App. 427, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 567 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

“ Assignments of error and recitals of fact in a petition for certiorari not affirmatively verified in the answer cannot be considered.” Shirling v. Kennon, 119 Ga. 501 (2) (46 S. E. 630). The answer of the justice of the peace to the petition for certiorari in this ease showing merely that a trial had been had before a jury, and containing a brief of the evidence, but wholly failing to show the rendition of any verdict, or to verify the allegations of the petition, and no exception to the answer having been made by the petitioner, the petition presented no question for determination, and it was error for the judge of the superior court to overrule the motion to dismiss of the opposite party and to sustain the petition. Manning v. Mayor &c. of Gainesville, 125 Ga. 239 (55 S. E. 1002); Southern Ry. Co. v. Chestnut Mountain Merchandise Co., 1 Ga. App. 731 (2, 3) (58 S. E. 247); Humphries v. Nalley, 14 Ga. App. 804 (2) (82 S. E. 357).

Judgment reversed.

Stephens and Hill, JJ., concur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

“ Assignments of error and recitals of fact in a petition for certiorari not affirmatively verified in the answer cannot be considered.” Shirling v. Kennon, 119 Ga. 501 (2) (46 S. E. 630). The answer of the justice of the peace to the petition for certiorari in this ease showing merely that a trial had been had before a jury, and containing a brief of the evidence, but wholly failing to show the rendition of any verdict, or to verify the allegations of the petition, and no exception to the answer having been made by the petitioner, the petition presented no question for determination, and it was error for the judge of the superior court to overrule the motion to dismiss of the opposite party and to sustain the petition. Manning v. Mayor &c. of Gainesville, 125 Ga. 239 (55 S. E. 1002); Southern Ry. Co. v. Chestnut Mountain Merchandise Co., 1 Ga. App. 731 (2, 3) (58 S. E. 247); Humphries v. Nalley, 14 Ga. App. 804 (2) (82 S. E. 357).

Judgment reversed.

Stephens and Hill, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 579, 28 Ga. App. 427, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-coleman-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack