Williamson v. Nabers

Supreme Court of Georgia

Williamson v. Nabers

14 Ga. 285

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedOctober 15, 1853

DocketNo. 42

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 14 Ga. 285 (Williamson v. Nabers) 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

Williamson v. Nabers, 14 Ga. 285 (Ga. 1853).

Pincite

Opinion

[286]*286 By the Court.

Starnes, J.,

delivering the opinion.

[1.] We overrule the motion, for the following reasons:— 1. As two of the members of this Court may constitute a Court, so a citation issued in the name of two, is valid. It is true, that the 25th Rule of this Court, in furnishing a form of citation, directs that it shall be attended in the names of three Judges. But we regard this as directory only. It is not to be taken literally; otherwise, so long as the Rule remains unchanged, a citation can only issue in the names of the throe persons therein specified; which would lead to an absurd result. Regarding the Rule in the light of a direction as to form, merely, we think that the citation may issue in the names of any two or more Judges of the Court.

2. This defect in the record, if it be one, is as to matter of form only, and may be amended. We will therefore allow an insertion of the name of that Judge of this Court, which has been omitted; and the Clerk is directed to place an order to this effect upon the minutes.

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

[286]*286 By the Court.

Starnes, J.,

delivering the opinion.

[1.] We overrule the motion, for the following reasons:— 1. As two of the members of this Court may constitute a Court, so a citation issued in the name of two, is valid. It is true, that the 25th Rule of this Court, in furnishing a form of citation, directs that it shall be attended in the names of three Judges. But we regard this as directory only. It is not to be taken literally; otherwise, so long as the Rule remains unchanged, a citation can only issue in the names of the throe persons therein specified; which would lead to an absurd result. Regarding the Rule in the light of a direction as to form, merely, we think that the citation may issue in the names of any two or more Judges of the Court.

2. This defect in the record, if it be one, is as to matter of form only, and may be amended. We will therefore allow an insertion of the name of that Judge of this Court, which has been omitted; and the Clerk is directed to place an order to this effect upon the minutes.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 Ga. 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williamson-v-nabers-ga-1853.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack