Mott v. Mustian

Supreme Court of Georgia

Mott v. Mustian

43 Ga. 380

DecidedJuly 15, 1871

StatusPublished

This text of 43 Ga. 380 (Mott v. Mustian) 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

Mott v. Mustian, 43 Ga. 380 (Ga. 1871).

Pincite

Opinion

Warner, Judge.

This was a motion to dismiss a bill pending on the equity side of the Court. It appears from the record, that the bill was filed on the 31st of December, 1869, and the process attached thereto required the defendant to appear on the fourth Monday in October, 1870, and was served on the defendant 22d of April, 1870. The complainant moved to amend said process, so as to make it returnable to the May Term of the Court, 1871, and have an alias subpcena issued, returnable to said term; which motion the Court allowed, and refused to dismiss the bill; whereupon, the defendant excepted. Under the liberal provisions of the Code, as to amendments of pleadings and process, there was no error in the Court in allowing the amendment of the process, and this Court will not interfere with the exercise of its discretion in doing so in this case, and refusing to dismiss the complainant’s bill.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Warner, Judge.

This was a motion to dismiss a bill pending on the equity side of the Court. It appears from the record, that the bill was filed on the 31st of December, 1869, and the process attached thereto required the defendant to appear on the fourth Monday in October, 1870, and was served on the defendant 22d of April, 1870. The complainant moved to amend said process, so as to make it returnable to the May Term of the Court, 1871, and have an alias subpcena issued, returnable to said term; which motion the Court allowed, and refused to dismiss the bill; whereupon, the defendant excepted. Under the liberal provisions of the Code, as to amendments of pleadings and process, there was no error in the Court in allowing the amendment of the process, and this Court will not interfere with the exercise of its discretion in doing so in this case, and refusing to dismiss the complainant’s bill.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 Ga. 380, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mott-v-mustian-ga-1871.