Perkins v. Castleberry

50 S.E. 107, 122 Ga. 294, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 182
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 4, 1905·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Cobb, J.

This was an equity case. The exception was classified as an exception of law. It is by no means clear that this was a -correct classification, and possibly this was a sufficient reason to strike the exception. Tippin v. Perry, 122 Ga. 120. But without reference to this question, and whether the exception be treated as an exception of law or as an exception of fact„ it was insufficient; for in either case the determination of the question raised was dependent upon the evidence in the ease,, and the exception failed to point out those portions of the evidence that were úecessary to a determination of the question. [295]*295Butler v. Railway Co., 119 Ga. 959; Weldon v. Hudson, 120 Ga. 702. The case of Anderson v. Blair, 121 Ga. 120, was not an equity case. No sufficient reason has been shown for reversing the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Perkins v. Castleberry, 50 S.E. 107, 122 Ga. 294, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 182 (Ga. 1905).

50 S.E. 107 (Perkins v. Castleberry) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Tovell v. Legum
60 S.E.2d 339 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Fuqua v. Hadden
16 S.E.2d 728 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
First State Bank v. Avera
51 S.E. 665 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)
Armstrong v. Winter
50 S.E. 997 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)