Stedham v. Farmers State Bank
Opinion
In the bill of exceptions the only judgment excepted to was the overruling of a motion for a continuance of the ease. There was no exception to the verdict and the judgment based thereon. It is obvious that a judgment overruling a motion to continue a cause is not a final judgment within the meaning of section 6138 of the Civil Code of 1910; and the bill of exceptions, containing no exceptions to any judgment or decision final in its nature, can not be entertained. See, in this connection, Moore v. Hill, 87 Ga. 91 (13 S. E. 259); Barney v. Bowles, 112 Ga. 421 (37 S. E. 364) ; MeCranie v. Shipp, 10 Ga. App. 544 (73 S. E. 701); Cheney v. Corbitt Motor Truck Co., 36 Ga. App. 590 (137 S. E. 412).
Writ of error dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
141 S.E. 90 (Stedham v. Farmers State Bank) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.