Slaughter v. City of Lagrange

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Slaughter v. City of Lagrange

4 S.E.2d 410, 60 Ga. App. 555, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 80

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 7, 1939

Docket27811

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 4 S.E.2d 410 (Slaughter v. City of Lagrange) 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

Slaughter v. City of Lagrange, 4 S.E.2d 410, 60 Ga. App. 555, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 80 (Ga. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In a trial before a municipal court the recorder . . may take judicial notice of the ordinances of the city, defining offenses against the same. [But] Neither the Supreme Court nor any other court than the municipal court can take judicial cognizance of a municipal ordinance.” Hill v. Atlanta, 125 Ga. 697 (54 S. E. 354, 5 Ann. Cas. 614); Bateman v. Atlanta, 51 Ga. App. 10 (179 S. E. 403).

2. “When a petition for certiorari, brought to review a judgment rendered in a municipal court, assigns error upon the judgment of that court, on the ground that the same is contrary to the evidence, and the existence of the ordinance alleged to have been violated is admitted in the petition, but the provisions of the ordinance are not set out [in the petition nor attached thereto as exhibits] either 'literally or in substance, it is impossible to tell whether any error has been committed, and this is a sufficient reason for a judge of a superior court to refuse to sanction the petition.” Hill v. Atlanta, and Bateman v. Atlanta, supra.

3. Applying the foregoing rulings to the facts of the instant case, the court did not err in refusing to sanction the petition for certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. “In a trial before a municipal court the recorder . . may take judicial notice of the ordinances of the city, defining offenses against the same. [But] Neither the Supreme Court nor any other court than the municipal court can take judicial cognizance of a municipal ordinance.” Hill v. Atlanta, 125 Ga. 697 (54 S. E. 354, 5 Ann. Cas. 614); Bateman v. Atlanta, 51 Ga. App. 10 (179 S. E. 403).

2. “When a petition for certiorari, brought to review a judgment rendered in a municipal court, assigns error upon the judgment of that court, on the ground that the same is contrary to the evidence, and the existence of the ordinance alleged to have been violated is admitted in the petition, but the provisions of the ordinance are not set out [in the petition nor attached thereto as exhibits] either 'literally or in substance, it is impossible to tell whether any error has been committed, and this is a sufficient reason for a judge of a superior court to refuse to sanction the petition.” Hill v. Atlanta, and Bateman v. Atlanta, supra.

3. Applying the foregoing rulings to the facts of the instant case, the court did not err in refusing to sanction the petition for certiorari.

Judgment affirmed.

MacIntyre and Guerry, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 S.E.2d 410, 60 Ga. App. 555, 1939 Ga. App. LEXIS 80, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slaughter-v-city-of-lagrange-gactapp-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack