Sweeney v. Dickey

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sweeney v. Dickey

89 S.E. 1090, 18 Ga. App. 631, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1154

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 21, 1916

Docket7580

StatusPublished

This text of 89 S.E. 1090 (Sweeney v. Dickey) 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

Sweeney v. Dickey, 89 S.E. 1090, 18 Ga. App. 631, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1154 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Hodges, J.

The error complained of in the hill of exceptions in this case' is the overruling of a motion for a new trial. The document sent up in the record as a brief of the evidence contains 47 pages of typewriting, the greater part of which consists of questions and answers, and is not a compliance with the provisions of the code and the rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court as to the briefing of evidence. Park’s Code, vol. 5, § 6093, and annotations. It is held by the Supreme Court that “When there is no legal brief of evidence filed with the motion for new trial, but only a document which fails to comply with the provisions of the Civil Code (1910), § 6093, the Court of Appeals should not look to such a document for the purpose of determining the questions raised in the motion for new trial.” Whitaker v. State, 138 Ga. 139 (4 a), 145 (75 S. E. 254). The judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must therefore be Affirmed.

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

Hodges, J.

The error complained of in the hill of exceptions in this case' is the overruling of a motion for a new trial. The document sent up in the record as a brief of the evidence contains 47 pages of typewriting, the greater part of which consists of questions and answers, and is not a compliance with the provisions of the code and the rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court as to the briefing of evidence. Park’s Code, vol. 5, § 6093, and annotations. It is held by the Supreme Court that “When there is no legal brief of evidence filed with the motion for new trial, but only a document which fails to comply with the provisions of the Civil Code (1910), § 6093, the Court of Appeals should not look to such a document for the purpose of determining the questions raised in the motion for new trial.” Whitaker v. State, 138 Ga. 139 (4 a), 145 (75 S. E. 254). The judgment overruling the motion for a new trial must therefore be Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

89 S.E. 1090, 18 Ga. App. 631, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 1154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sweeney-v-dickey-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack