Shearouse & Brother v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia

Shearouse & Brother v. Smith

11 S.E. 560, 83 Ga. 520, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 104

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 28, 1889

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 S.E. 560 (Shearouse & Brother v. Smith) 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

Shearouse & Brother v. Smith, 11 S.E. 560, 83 Ga. 520, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 104 (Ga. 1889).

Pincite

Opinion

Bleckley, Chief Justice.

The statute (acts of 1882-3, p. 103) provides that when a mandamus nisi is returned in vacation, the answer shall be then heard if no issue of fact is presented, but that if. the answer presents an issue of fact, the hearing (unless both parties consent) shall take place at the next term of the court. Here the judge decided that the answer did present issues of fact, and so holding, he declined to adjudicate further upon the answer than to order the hearing postponed until the regular term. This order was no final disposition, either of the answer or the writ, and the case in all its integrity is still pending in the court below. This being so, the motion to dismiss the writ of error as prematurely brought should be granted. Leave is given, however, to enter the bill of exceptions as exceptions taken pendente lite, so that if material error was committed in this interlocutory stage of the case it may be reached hereafter.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Bleckley, Chief Justice.

The statute (acts of 1882-3, p. 103) provides that when a mandamus nisi is returned in vacation, the answer shall be then heard if no issue of fact is presented, but that if. the answer presents an issue of fact, the hearing (unless both parties consent) shall take place at the next term of the court. Here the judge decided that the answer did present issues of fact, and so holding, he declined to adjudicate further upon the answer than to order the hearing postponed until the regular term. This order was no final disposition, either of the answer or the writ, and the case in all its integrity is still pending in the court below. This being so, the motion to dismiss the writ of error as prematurely brought should be granted. Leave is given, however, to enter the bill of exceptions as exceptions taken pendente lite, so that if material error was committed in this interlocutory stage of the case it may be reached hereafter.

Writ of error dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 S.E. 560, 83 Ga. 520, 1889 Ga. LEXIS 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shearouse-brother-v-smith-ga-1889.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack