Smith v. Morris
This text of 29 Ga. 339 (Smith v. Morris) 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.
Opinion
By the Court.
delivering the opinion.
The objection to this process would, no doubt, be good at common law. For there the process is independent of the declaration, which is not filed until after the defendant has been brought into Court, by means of the process. Hence it must be full and complete of itself. Not so, however, under the Judiciary Act of 1799. That requires the process to be “annexed” to the writ. They must, therefore, be taken together. By the process, the Sheriff is commanded to summon the defendant to appear at the next Term of the Court to which it is returnable. The writ shows who the defendant is. Thus identified, he was served by the Sheriff, did appear, and filed his defence to,the action. We hold the process was good.
Were it deficient, it is amendable under the ninth section of the Judiciary Act, which the plaintiff proposed doing, but was refused by the Court.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
29 Ga. 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-morris-ga-1859.