North Atlanta Land Co. v. Portness

74 S.E. 1000, 138 Ga. 135, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 224
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 14, 1912
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 74 S.E. 1000 (North Atlanta Land Co. v. Portness) 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
North Atlanta Land Co. v. Portness, 74 S.E. 1000, 138 Ga. 135, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 224 (Ga. 1912).

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. In equity cases submitted to an auditor, to whose report exceptions of law and fact are filed, the trial judge can, in his discretion, decline to submit the exceptions of fact to a jury, unless he approves them. He may disapprove the exceptions and thereupon enter a decree. Stone v. Risner, 111 Ga. 809 (35 S. E. 648); Hogan v. Walsh, 122 Ga. 283 (50 S. E. 84); Austin v. Southern Home Association, 122 Ga. 440 (7), 448 (50 S. E. 382).

2. Where in' an equity case referred to an auditor the evidence supported his findings, the trial judge did not err in overruling the exceptions of fact thereto. Rogers v. Stern, 112 Ga. 624 (37 S. E. 877); Cranston v. Bank of the State of Georgia, 112 Ga. 617 (37 S. E. 875); Fowler v. Davis, 120 Ga. 442 (2), 443 (47 S. E. 951).

3. While several exceptions of law and fact were filed to the auditor’s report, substantially they hinged upon the general question whether under the law and the evidence the report was sustainable. Upon a careful review of the evidence and consideration of the law, it is held that the findings of the auditor were all supported, and there was no error committed in overruling the exceptions of law and fact, nor in entering the decree complained of.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Exceptions to auditor’s report. Before Judge Pendleton. Pulton superior court. May 10, 1911. J. F. & L. F. McClelland, for plaintiffs in. error. Westmoreland Brothers, contra.

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

Related

McCrea v. Georgia Power Co.
1 S.E.2d 664 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1939)
Hicks v. Stewart Oil Co.
186 S.E. 802 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Drew v. Drew
187 S.E. 32 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1936)
Dougherty-Little-Redwine-Co. v. Hatcher
151 S.E. 796 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)
Henderson Lumber Co. v. Chatham Bank & Trust Co.
149 S.E. 885 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1929)
Electric City Brick Co. v. Hagler
149 S.E. 126 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1929)
Graves v. Decatur
146 S.E. 630 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1929)
Mathewson v. Reed
99 S.E. 854 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 S.E. 1000, 138 Ga. 135, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-atlanta-land-co-v-portness-ga-1912.