West v. Williams

Supreme Court of Georgia

West v. Williams

11 S.E. 505, 84 Ga. 665

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 12, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 S.E. 505 (West v. Williams) 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

West v. Williams, 11 S.E. 505, 84 Ga. 665 (Ga. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Simmons, Justice.

1. The evidence was conflicting in this ease. The magistrate who tried the issue under the possessory warrant found in favor of the defendant in error. A writ of certiorari from his decision was sued out, and granted by the judge. Upon the hearing thereof, the judgment of the magistrate was affirmed. The evidence being conflicting, and the judge being satisfied with the judgment of the magistrate, we cannot say that he erred in overruling the certiorari.

2. The magistrate having failed to fix the amount of the bond required under the statute, there was no error in the trial judge fixing the amount and requiring the bond to be given according to law. In the case of Hillyer v. Brogden, 67 Ga. 24, where no bond was required of the plaintiff, this court remanded the case with directions that the superior court modify its judgment and require a bond. We think, therefore, it was proper for the judge of the superior court, in passing finally upon the case, to require the bond to be given.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Simmons, Justice.

1. The evidence was conflicting in this ease. The magistrate who tried the issue under the possessory warrant found in favor of the defendant in error. A writ of certiorari from his decision was sued out, and granted by the judge. Upon the hearing thereof, the judgment of the magistrate was affirmed. The evidence being conflicting, and the judge being satisfied with the judgment of the magistrate, we cannot say that he erred in overruling the certiorari.

2. The magistrate having failed to fix the amount of the bond required under the statute, there was no error in the trial judge fixing the amount and requiring the bond to be given according to law. In the case of Hillyer v. Brogden, 67 Ga. 24, where no bond was required of the plaintiff, this court remanded the case with directions that the superior court modify its judgment and require a bond. We think, therefore, it was proper for the judge of the superior court, in passing finally upon the case, to require the bond to be given.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 S.E. 505, 84 Ga. 665, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-williams-ga-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack