Tanner v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Tanner v. State

92 S.E. 943, 20 Ga. App. 161, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 769

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1917

Docket8355

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 S.E. 943 (Tanner v. State) 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

Tanner v. State, 92 S.E. 943, 20 Ga. App. 161, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 769 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where a motion for a new trial is filed in term time and a rule nisi is issued thereon and the motion set for hearing on a certain day in vacation, the case must be heard on that day, and the hearing can not be orally postponed to a later day. If the case be not heard in vacation at the time fixed by proper order, the motion goes to the next regular term of the court, unless it be disposed of pursuant to the Civil Code (1910), §§ 4852, 4853, 6090. Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Ry. Co. v. Strickland, 114 Ga. 998 (41 S. E. 501) ; Lott v. Wood, 135 Ga. 821 (70 S. E. 661) ; Perry v. State, 12 Ga. App. 573 (77 S. E. 879).

2. The motion for a new trial in this case having been set for hearing in vacation on October 14, 1916, and no formal written order having been passed continuing the motion to another day in vacation, it was error to dismiss the motion at a later day in vacation on the ground that no brief of evidence had been filed and served on the opposite party on October 14, 1916.

Judgment reversed.

Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

1. Where a motion for a new trial is filed in term time and a rule nisi is issued thereon and the motion set for hearing on a certain day in vacation, the case must be heard on that day, and the hearing can not be orally postponed to a later day. If the case be not heard in vacation at the time fixed by proper order, the motion goes to the next regular term of the court, unless it be disposed of pursuant to the Civil Code (1910), §§ 4852, 4853, 6090. Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Ry. Co. v. Strickland, 114 Ga. 998 (41 S. E. 501) ; Lott v. Wood, 135 Ga. 821 (70 S. E. 661) ; Perry v. State, 12 Ga. App. 573 (77 S. E. 879).

2. The motion for a new trial in this case having been set for hearing in vacation on October 14, 1916, and no formal written order having been passed continuing the motion to another day in vacation, it was error to dismiss the motion at a later day in vacation on the ground that no brief of evidence had been filed and served on the opposite party on October 14, 1916.

Judgment reversed.

Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 S.E. 943, 20 Ga. App. 161, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tanner-v-state-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack