Simpson v. Simpson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Simpson v. Simpson

49 S.E.2d 898, 204 Ga. 344, 1948 Ga. LEXIS 446

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 11, 1948

Docket16365.

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 49 S.E.2d 898 (Simpson v. Simpson) 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

Simpson v. Simpson, 49 S.E.2d 898, 204 Ga. 344, 1948 Ga. LEXIS 446 (Ga. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Groves, Justice.

1. While no motion has been made to dismiss the writ of error, although counsel for the defendant in error argues in his brief that such should be done, yet “where it appears that this court is with- • out jurisdiction to entertain the bill of exceptions, it can not properly do otherwise than to dismiss the writ of error upon its own motion.” Etheridge v. Henderson, 188 Ga. 189 (2) (3 S. E. 2d, 674).

*345 No. 16365. October 11, 1948. Hattie B. Bell, for plaintiff in error. Edtoard F. Taylor, contra.

2. It appearing from the record that judgment was rendered for temporary alimony after the defendant’s demurrer had been overruled, and the only assignment of error in the bill of exceptions being on exceptions pendente lite to the overruling of such demurrer — which in such circumstances is reviewable only after the termination of the case and where error is also assigned on the final judgment — the writ of error must be dismissed. Durrence v. Waters, 140 Ga. 762 (1) (70 S. E. 841); Smith v. Barksdale, 199 Ga. 723 (35 S. E. 2d, 149); Kronstadt v. Ray, 201 Ga. 312 (39 S. E. 2d, 664).

Writ oj error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Bell, J., absent on account of illness.

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

Groves, Justice.

1. While no motion has been made to dismiss the writ of error, although counsel for the defendant in error argues in his brief that such should be done, yet “where it appears that this court is with- • out jurisdiction to entertain the bill of exceptions, it can not properly do otherwise than to dismiss the writ of error upon its own motion.” Etheridge v. Henderson, 188 Ga. 189 (2) (3 S. E. 2d, 674).

*345 No. 16365. October 11, 1948. Hattie B. Bell, for plaintiff in error. Edtoard F. Taylor, contra.

2. It appearing from the record that judgment was rendered for temporary alimony after the defendant’s demurrer had been overruled, and the only assignment of error in the bill of exceptions being on exceptions pendente lite to the overruling of such demurrer — which in such circumstances is reviewable only after the termination of the case and where error is also assigned on the final judgment — the writ of error must be dismissed. Durrence v. Waters, 140 Ga. 762 (1) (70 S. E. 841); Smith v. Barksdale, 199 Ga. 723 (35 S. E. 2d, 149); Kronstadt v. Ray, 201 Ga. 312 (39 S. E. 2d, 664).

Writ oj error dismissed.

All the Justices concur, except Bell, J., absent on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 S.E.2d 898, 204 Ga. 344, 1948 Ga. LEXIS 446, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simpson-v-simpson-ga-1948.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack