Vines v. State Ex Rel. Boykin

21 S.E.2d 853, 194 Ga. 442, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 594
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 15, 1942
Docket14239.
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 21 S.E.2d 853 (Vines v. State Ex Rel. Boykin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Vines v. State Ex Rel. Boykin, 21 S.E.2d 853, 194 Ga. 442, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 594 (Ga. 1942).

Opinion

Reid, Chief Justice.

This case is on exceptions to a judgment of Fulton superior court in a contempt proceeding brought by the State of Georgia ex. rel. John A. Boykin, solicitor general, against Mrs. M. S. Vines, being a rule and citation requiring her to show cause why she should not be adjudged in contempt of court by reason of her failure to respond to certain subpmnas duces tecum and why certain documents alleged to be in her possession should not be restored, impounded, and a custodian therefor appointed by the court. Also under consideration was a motion of Mrs. Vines to quash certain subpoenas. After hearing-evidence the court adjudged that the motion of Mrs. Vines to quash the subpoenas of February 25 be sustained; that Mrs. Vines was guilty of contempt of court; “that the court has no authority to order production of papers called for by the subpoenas of February 26; that the court has no power to impound the documents.” In the bill of exceptions the plaintiff in error sets out that “The Supreme Court has jurisdiction of this case, because it involves the consideration of a charge of contempt of court.” Under article 6, section 2, paragraph 5, of the constitution (Code, § 2-3005), the Supreme Court has jurisdiction of certain enumerated cases; and'the present case not being within such enumerated cases, it is transferred to the Court of Appeals. See Goodwyn v. R oop, 181 Ga. 327 (182 S. E. 4), and cit.

All the Justices concw. *443 H. A. Allen, Morgan Belser, Hal Lindsay, and Howard, Tiller & Howard, for plaintiff in error. James A. Branch, John A. Boykin, solicitor-general, and B. A. Stephens, contra.

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

Related

State v. Murray
687 S.E.2d 790 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2009)
Nowlin v. Davis
599 S.E.2d 128 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 2004)
Cranford v. Cranford
165 S.E.2d 847 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
21 S.E.2d 853, 194 Ga. 442, 1942 Ga. LEXIS 594, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vines-v-state-ex-rel-boykin-ga-1942.