Sirmans, Morris & Co. v. Zucker Importing Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sirmans, Morris & Co. v. Zucker Importing Co.

72 S.E. 190, 9 Ga. App. 789, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 329

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 30, 1911

Docket3070

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 72 S.E. 190 (Sirmans, Morris & Co. v. Zucker Importing Co.) 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

Sirmans, Morris & Co. v. Zucker Importing Co., 72 S.E. 190, 9 Ga. App. 789, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 329 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

1. When a certiorari comes on for hearing, the recitals of the petition are not to be taken as true, unless verified by the answer or by the record sent up in connection therewith. Taft Co. v. Smith, 112 Ga. 196 (1), (37 S. E. 424) ; Landrum v. Moss, 1 Ga. App. 216 (57 S. E. 965). The rule applicable in cases of refusal to sanction a petition, that the allegations of the petition are to be taken as true (see Green v. State, 4 Ga. App. 261, 61 S. E. 234; Hood v. State, 4 Ga. App. 847, 62 S. E. 570; Bush v. Roberts, 4 Ga. App. 531, 62 S. E. 92), does not apply when the case comes on for final hearing.

2. It is proper to dismiss a certiorari where, after the answer is in, it does not affirmatively appear that the writ was applied for within thirty days from the final determination of the case in the magistrate’s court. Aliunde proof is not admissible to show that the writ of certiorari was [790]*790applied for within the time prescribed. Landrum v. Moss, 1 Ga. App. 216 (1, 4), (57 S. E. 965). Judgment affirmed.

Decided September 30, 1911.

Certiorari; from Coffee superior court — Judge Parker. October 20, 1910.

O’Bleen & Wallace, for plaintiffs in error. B. T. Allen, contra.

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

Russell, J.

1. When a certiorari comes on for hearing, the recitals of the petition are not to be taken as true, unless verified by the answer or by the record sent up in connection therewith. Taft Co. v. Smith, 112 Ga. 196 (1), (37 S. E. 424) ; Landrum v. Moss, 1 Ga. App. 216 (57 S. E. 965). The rule applicable in cases of refusal to sanction a petition, that the allegations of the petition are to be taken as true (see Green v. State, 4 Ga. App. 261, 61 S. E. 234; Hood v. State, 4 Ga. App. 847, 62 S. E. 570; Bush v. Roberts, 4 Ga. App. 531, 62 S. E. 92), does not apply when the case comes on for final hearing.

2. It is proper to dismiss a certiorari where, after the answer is in, it does not affirmatively appear that the writ was applied for within thirty days from the final determination of the case in the magistrate’s court. Aliunde proof is not admissible to show that the writ of certiorari was [790]*790applied for within the time prescribed. Landrum v. Moss, 1 Ga. App. 216 (1, 4), (57 S. E. 965). Judgment affirmed.

Decided September 30, 1911.

Certiorari; from Coffee superior court — Judge Parker. October 20, 1910.

O’Bleen & Wallace, for plaintiffs in error. B. T. Allen, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 S.E. 190, 9 Ga. App. 789, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sirmans-morris-co-v-zucker-importing-co-gactapp-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack