Smith v. Perryman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Smith v. Perryman

144 S.E. 341, 38 Ga. App. 496, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 310

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 29, 1928

Docket18659

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 144 S.E. 341 (Smith v. Perryman) 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

Smith v. Perryman, 144 S.E. 341, 38 Ga. App. 496, 1928 Ga. App. LEXIS 310 (Ga. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

Since the award of a nonsuit can not be reviewed by a motion for a new trial, the court did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial. Farmers Union Warehouse &c. Co. v. Stewart, 138 Ga. 733 (75 S. E. 1131); Buchanan v. James, 134 Ga. 475 (68 S. E. 72).

2. If in such a suit this court has jurisdiction to entertain and pass upon the assignments of error made in the exceptions pendente lite filed by the defendant, there is no assignment of error in the bill of exceptions, either upon the exceptions pendente lite or upon the rulings complained of in the exceptions pendente lité. Therefore the alleged errors complained of in the exceptions pendente lite can not be considered.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Bell, J., eoneu.r.

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