Patten v. Stoner

Supreme Court of Georgia

Patten v. Stoner

63 S.E. 827, 132 Ga. 177, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 59

DecidedFebruary 22, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 63 S.E. 827 (Patten v. Stoner) 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

Patten v. Stoner, 63 S.E. 827, 132 Ga. 177, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 59 (Ga. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

Evans, P. J.

There being no complaint that the court abused Bis disere-, tion in refusing to dismiss the motion for a new trial because of a failure to file the brief of evidence in strict conformity with a term order, this case is controlled under its special facts by the rulings made in Napier v. Heilker, 115 Ga. 168 (41 S. E. 689), Broadway National Bank v. Kendrick, 124 Ga. 1053 (53 S. E. 576), and Eady v. A. C. L. R. Co., 129 Ga. 363 (58 S. E. 895); and the judgment is

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Evans, P. J.

There being no complaint that the court abused Bis disere-, tion in refusing to dismiss the motion for a new trial because of a failure to file the brief of evidence in strict conformity with a term order, this case is controlled under its special facts by the rulings made in Napier v. Heilker, 115 Ga. 168 (41 S. E. 689), Broadway National Bank v. Kendrick, 124 Ga. 1053 (53 S. E. 576), and Eady v. A. C. L. R. Co., 129 Ga. 363 (58 S. E. 895); and the judgment is

Affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 S.E. 827, 132 Ga. 177, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 59, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patten-v-stoner-ga-1909.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack