Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Tenenbaum v. Knight

Tenenbaum v. Knight

103 S.E. 496, 25 Ga. App. 374, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 810
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 15, 1920
Docket10981
StatusPublished

This text of 103 S.E. 496 (Tenenbaum v. Knight) 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
Tenenbaum v. Knight, 103 S.E. 496, 25 Ga. App. 374, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 810 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

“ Under the provisions of the act approved August 17, 1915 (Acts 1915, p. 117), entitled ‘An act to amend an aet establishing the city court of Reidsville/ relative to the selection of jurors, the number of jurors, etc., the city court of Reidsville is not a court from which a writ of error will lie directly to the Supreme Court or to the Court of Appeals. Ash v. People’s Bank of Oliver, 149 Ga. 713 (101 S. E. 912).” Kennedy v. Kicklighter, 150 Ga. 276 (103 S. E. 153). Consequently the writ of error in this case must be

Dismissed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth and Luke, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Ash v. Peoples Bank
101 S.E. 912 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1920)
Kennedy v. Kicklighter
103 S.E. 153 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
103 S.E. 496, 25 Ga. App. 374, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 810, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tenenbaum-v-knight-gactapp-1920.