Ross v. Griffin

Supreme Court of Georgia

Ross v. Griffin

77 S.E.2d 523, 210 Ga. 22, 1953 Ga. LEXIS 469

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 14, 1953

Docket18300

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 77 S.E.2d 523 (Ross v. Griffin) 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

Ross v. Griffin, 77 S.E.2d 523, 210 Ga. 22, 1953 Ga. LEXIS 469 (Ga. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

1. Where, as here, a motion for new trial is pending in the lower court and remains undisposed of, plaintiff in error is precluded from coming to this court upon a bill of exceptions based on the final decree, as there can be no final judgment so long as a valid motion for new trial is pending, and, for this reason, the writ of error must be dismissed as premature. Code (Ann. Supp.), § 6-701 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 730); Darden v. Roberts, 193 Ga. 637 (19 S. E. 2d 270).

2. In the present case the final decree was vacated May 13, 1953, and a new decree entered thereon nunc pro tunc as of May 8, 1953. The plaintiff in error tendered the bill of exceptions thereto on May 23, 1953, in accordance with Code (Ann. Supp.) § 6-902 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 734), and on the same date the defendants in error filed their motion for new trial. Under these circumstances, leave is granted to the plaintiff in error to treat the official copy of the bill of exceptions on file in the trial court as exceptions pendente lite.

Writ oj error dismissed with direction.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P.J., not participating. Erie M. Donalson, for plaintiff in error. Conger & Conger, J. Willis Conger, contra.

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

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

1. Where, as here, a motion for new trial is pending in the lower court and remains undisposed of, plaintiff in error is precluded from coming to this court upon a bill of exceptions based on the final decree, as there can be no final judgment so long as a valid motion for new trial is pending, and, for this reason, the writ of error must be dismissed as premature. Code (Ann. Supp.), § 6-701 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 730); Darden v. Roberts, 193 Ga. 637 (19 S. E. 2d 270).

2. In the present case the final decree was vacated May 13, 1953, and a new decree entered thereon nunc pro tunc as of May 8, 1953. The plaintiff in error tendered the bill of exceptions thereto on May 23, 1953, in accordance with Code (Ann. Supp.) § 6-902 (Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 734), and on the same date the defendants in error filed their motion for new trial. Under these circumstances, leave is granted to the plaintiff in error to treat the official copy of the bill of exceptions on file in the trial court as exceptions pendente lite.

Writ oj error dismissed with direction.

All the Justices concur, except Atkinson, P.J., not participating. Erie M. Donalson, for plaintiff in error. Conger & Conger, J. Willis Conger, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 S.E.2d 523, 210 Ga. 22, 1953 Ga. LEXIS 469, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ross-v-griffin-ga-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack