Webb v. Thompson

170 S.E. 372, 177 Ga. 455, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 323
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 8, 1933
DocketNo. 9186
StatusPublished

This text of 170 S.E. 372 (Webb v. Thompson) 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
Webb v. Thompson, 170 S.E. 372, 177 Ga. 455, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 323 (Ga. 1933).

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

When, in an application for injunction, the evidence is not embodied in an approved brief of evidence and filed as a part of the record, nor contained in the bill of exceptions, nor attached thereto properly identified as a part thereof by the judge’s signature, the Supreme court can not consider any question made by an assignment of error the decision of which is dependent upon the evidence. Edmondson v. Edmondson, 128 Ga. 53 (3) (57 S. E. 308), and cit.; Blackman v. Garrett, 135 Ga. 226 (69 S. E. 110), and cit.; Town of Fairburn v. Edmondson, 160 Ga. 792 (129 S. E. 108) ; Federal Investment Co. v. Ewing, 165 Ga. 435 (141 S. E. 65), and cit.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Bill, J., absent because of illness. Tho'mas E. Scott, for plaintiff in error. W. E. Harclerode, contra.

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

Related

Edmondson v. Edmondson
57 S.E. 308 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907)
Blackman v. Garrett
69 S.E. 110 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1910)
Town of Fairburn v. Edmondson
129 S.E. 108 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)
Federal Investment Co. v. Ewing
141 S.E. 65 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
170 S.E. 372, 177 Ga. 455, 1933 Ga. LEXIS 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webb-v-thompson-ga-1933.