Taylor v. Wright

Supreme Court of Georgia

Taylor v. Wright

64 S.E. 656, 132 Ga. 586, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 366

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 13, 1909·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Beck, J.

In addition to the general exception stated in the headnote there were specific exceptions to the rulings of the court upon the question of the admissibility of certain oral testimony; but the judge in his certificate to the bill of exceptions states that this evidence was rejected by him and was not considered in reaching his finding and judgment as rendered; leaving as the only question to be considered the judgment which disposed of the ease upon the law and the facts. And, as we have ruled in the headnote, that assignment was too general to raise any question for consideration or determination here. Smith v. Marshall, 127 Ga. 374 (56 S. E. 416).

'Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, J.

In addition to the general exception stated in the headnote there were specific exceptions to the rulings of the court upon the question of the admissibility of certain oral testimony; but the judge in his certificate to the bill of exceptions states that this evidence was rejected by him and was not considered in reaching his finding and judgment as rendered; leaving as the only question to be considered the judgment which disposed of the ease upon the law and the facts. And, as we have ruled in the headnote, that assignment was too general to raise any question for consideration or determination here. Smith v. Marshall, 127 Ga. 374 (56 S. E. 416).

'Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Taylor v. Wright, 64 S.E. 656, 132 Ga. 586, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 366 (Ga. 1909).

Pincite

64 S.E. 656 (Taylor v. Wright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related