Warnock v. Woodard
188 S.E. 336, 183 Ga. 367
Opinion
It appearing from the record that there was no service of the bill of exceptions upon the defendant in error or his attorney, either personal or by acknowledgment, this court is without jurisdiction.
Writ of error dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Warnock v. Woodard, 188 S.E. 336, 183 Ga. 367 (Ga. 1936).
188 S.E. 336 (Warnock v. Woodard) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Fricks v. Cole
142 S.E.2d 382 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Sirmons v. Sirmons
137 S.E.2d 31 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1964)
Crane v. Balkcom
122 S.E.2d 82 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Nicholson v. Balkcom
121 S.E.2d 648 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1961)
Hulsey v. Atlanta Transit System, Inc.
102 S.E.2d 705 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1958)
Irwin v. LeCraw
58 S.E.2d 383 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Stepp v. North Georgia Feed Fertilizer Company
50 S.E.2d 377 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1948)
Armour v. Savage
77 Ga. App. 335 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1948)
South Side Atlanta Bank v. Anderson
37 S.E.2d 404 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1946)
Moore v. Sanford
34 S.E.2d 309 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Conaway v. Scott
22 S.E.2d 806 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1942)