Richards v. Dorsey

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Richards v. Dorsey

97 S.E. 458, 23 Ga. App. 50, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 32

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 12, 1918

Docket9704

StatusPublished

This text of 97 S.E. 458 (Richards v. Dorsey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Richards v. Dorsey, 97 S.E. 458, 23 Ga. App. 50, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 32 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

A careful examination of the record in this case fails to disclose evidence sufficient to authorize the judgment rendered by the trial judge, who by agreement heard the case without' the aid of a jury. The proof failed to §how that the automobile seized was at the time of seizure, as alleged in the petition to condemn, transporting intoxicating liquors. (Ga. L. 1917, Ex. Sess. 16.) It is not necessary to decide the question raised as to whether the proceeding to condemn was commenced within the time provided by the act und'er which it was instituted. For the reason that the evidence did not authorize it, the judgment of the trial court is

Reversed.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

A careful examination of the record in this case fails to disclose evidence sufficient to authorize the judgment rendered by the trial judge, who by agreement heard the case without' the aid of a jury. The proof failed to §how that the automobile seized was at the time of seizure, as alleged in the petition to condemn, transporting intoxicating liquors. (Ga. L. 1917, Ex. Sess. 16.) It is not necessary to decide the question raised as to whether the proceeding to condemn was commenced within the time provided by the act und'er which it was instituted. For the reason that the evidence did not authorize it, the judgment of the trial court is

Reversed.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

97 S.E. 458, 23 Ga. App. 50, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 32, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-dorsey-gactapp-1918.