Shaine & Son v. Block

111 S.E. 79, 28 Ga. App. 329, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 487

Opinion

Broyles, 0. J.

1. Where no proper brief of evidence is sent up, this court cannot decide any question which is dependent upon a consideration of the evidence. “ If all the assignments of error are of that class, a judgment of affirmance will result. If there are assignments of error, such as rulings on demurrers, or the like, which do not involve a consideration of the evidence, they may be passed on.” Crumbley v. Brook, 135 Ga. 723 (70 S. E. 655).

2. What purports to be a brief of the evidence in the instant case is evidently a copy of the stenographic report of the proceedings therein, and contains all the questions propounded by counsel on both sides to the • witnesses, the answers thereto, the objections of counsel to the admission of evidence, and the rulings of the court thereon. Such a paper is not a substantial compliance with the law as to the bringing of a brief of evidence to this court; and as all the grounds of error involve a consideration of the evidence, an affirmance must result.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Complaint; from city court of Greensboro — W. H. Fisher, judge pro hae vice. October 20, 1921.

J. A. Mitchell, for plaintiff in error. J. G. Faust, contra.