Taylor Bros. v. Howard

37 S.E. 392, 112 Ga. 347, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 152
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 29, 1900·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

Where, in undertaking to verify a hill of exceptions, the judge-in his certificate states that he does “not certify to arguments and conclusions ’ ’ therein contained, and upon an examination of the hill of exceptions it is impossible to determine what portions thereof the judge intended to characterize ” as “arguments and conclusions ” rather than recitals of fact, the writ of error must he dismissed. This court has no jurisdiction to consider a hill of exeep[348]*348tions where the certificate verifies it in part only and shows it to be in part untrue. Hawkins v. Americus, 102 Ga. 786; Fort v. Sheffield, 108 Ga. 781; Sanges v. State, 110 Ga. 260; McCullough Co. v. Bank, 111 Ga. 132.

Argued November 8, Decided November 29, 1900. Motion to dismiss writ of error. M. A. Lewis and H. A. Jenkins, for plaintiffs in error. J. S. Turner and W. F. Jenkins & Son, contra.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Taylor Bros. v. Howard, 37 S.E. 392, 112 Ga. 347, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 152 (Ga. 1900).

37 S.E. 392 (Taylor Bros. v. Howard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Peacock v. Peacock
93 S.E.2d 575 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1956)
Jones v. Pierce
17 S.E.2d 838 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Clary v. Nash
65 S.E. 301 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)