Williams v. Chambers

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Williams v. Chambers

122 S.E. 97, 31 Ga. App. 807, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 206

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 13, 1924

Docket15141

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 122 S.E. 97 (Williams v. Chambers) 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

Williams v. Chambers, 122 S.E. 97, 31 Ga. App. 807, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 206 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, J.

A judgment granting or refusing a motion to open a default is not a final judgment, nor is a judgment sustaining or overruling a demurrer to such a motion. Bell v. Stewart, 116 Ga. 714 (43 S. E. 70); [808]*808Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Pirkle, 9 Ga. App. 583 (1) (71 S. E. 946); Civil Code (1910), § 6138. The bill of exceptions contains no assignment of error upon any final judgment, and does not even show that any trial was ever had after the entry of default was opened. It is prematurely brought and this court is jurisdietionally unable to entertain it. The motion to dismiss is therefore sustained.

Decided March 13, 1924.

Motion to set aside default entry; from city court of Decatur— Judge Daley. September 29, 1923.

Jaclcson & Moore, for .plaintiff. Chambers, Dickey •& Ciiambers, for defendant.

Writ of error dismissed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Bell, J.

A judgment granting or refusing a motion to open a default is not a final judgment, nor is a judgment sustaining or overruling a demurrer to such a motion. Bell v. Stewart, 116 Ga. 714 (43 S. E. 70); [808]*808Farmers & Merchants Bank v. Pirkle, 9 Ga. App. 583 (1) (71 S. E. 946); Civil Code (1910), § 6138. The bill of exceptions contains no assignment of error upon any final judgment, and does not even show that any trial was ever had after the entry of default was opened. It is prematurely brought and this court is jurisdietionally unable to entertain it. The motion to dismiss is therefore sustained.

Decided March 13, 1924.

Motion to set aside default entry; from city court of Decatur— Judge Daley. September 29, 1923.

Jaclcson & Moore, for .plaintiff. Chambers, Dickey •& Ciiambers, for defendant.

Writ of error dismissed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

122 S.E. 97, 31 Ga. App. 807, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-chambers-gactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack