Platen v. Ordinary of Chatham County

60 Ga. 422
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 15, 1878
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 60 Ga. 422 (Platen v. Ordinary of Chatham County) 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
Platen v. Ordinary of Chatham County, 60 Ga. 422 (Ga. 1878).

Opinion

Bleckley, Judge.

The ground of motion to reinstate a cause being that it was called for trial and dismissed for want of prosecution, without the plaintiff’s knowledge and consent, and during his absence from the state, the motion ought to have been refused, unconditionally, unless a good reason was shown why the plaintiff was absent, and why he was not i'epresented. If any reason was shown in the court below, it ought to have been set out in the record or the bill of ex[423]*423ceptions, so that the supreme court could determine whether the case should be reinstated or not. The permission to reinstate, on condition of paying costs, may have been more favorable to the plaintiff than he was entitled to, instead of less favorable. The supreme court not being informed, authoritatively, why he was absent, or why he was not properly represented, cannot hold that he was entitled to reinstate at all, much less that he was entitled to reinstate on better terms than the superior court prescribed.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Kenemer v. Arkansas Fuel Oil Company
21 S.E.2d 348 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
60 Ga. 422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/platen-v-ordinary-of-chatham-county-ga-1878.