Worth v. Borough of Atlanta

169 S.E. 242, 46 Ga. App. 743, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 224
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 13, 1933·No. 22693·Published

Opinion

Guerry, J.

This ease was presented to the Supreme Court to adjudicate certain constitutional questions. The Supreme Court ruled that it was without jurisdiction to hear and determine such questions, since they were first raised in the petition for certiorari, and the case is transferred to this court for determination (175 Ga. 377). Only the general grounds are urged here. It was contended in the brief of plaintiff in error that the venue and the time were not proved at the trial. A specific assignment or reference to such exception is as necessary in a petition for certiorari as it is in a motion for a new trial. Penal Code (1910), § 1101 (1). The evidence amply supports the verdict.

Judgment affio-med.

Broyles, Q. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Worth v. Borough of Atlanta, 169 S.E. 242, 46 Ga. App. 743, 1933 Ga. App. LEXIS 224 (Ga. Ct. App. 1933).

169 S.E. 242 (Worth v. Borough of Atlanta) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Worth v. Borough of Atlanta
165 S.E. 245 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1932)