63 Ga. 309 (Ga. 1879), Stone v. Taylor
|Citation:||63 Ga. 309|
|Opinion Judge:||BLECKLEY, Justice.|
|Party Name:||STONE, caveator, v. TAYLOR, propounder.|
|Attorney:||PORTER INGRAM; THORNTON & GRIMES; JOHNSON & THORNTON, for plaintiff in error. B. H. CRAWFORD; SMITH & LITTLE, for defendant.|
|Judge Panel:||[Warner, Chief Justice,|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Georgia|
1. When a motion for a new trial is made in term, and by consent of parties an order is taken to perfect the brief of evidence, by a specified day, in vacation, and to hear the motion on that day at chambers, the judge sitting at chambers on and by successive adjournments, after the appointed day, has full possession of the matter, and with or without consent, may give such further time to complete the brief and prepare for the hearing as he deems proper in view of the cause shown. In 59 Ga. 626, no motion for a new trial was made in term, and consequently enough was not done to comply with section 3719 of the Code. In 57 Ga. 193, there was no action in vacation within the time designated by the consent order as entered on the minutes.
2. The charge of the court was pertinent, full and correct. There was no material omission; and no error in refusing the request to charge which was not given. And the verdict is supported by the evidence.
New trial. Before Judge CRAWFORD. Muscogee Superior Court. November Adjourned Term, 1878.
1. On the point of practice the views of the court are set forth in the first head-note. The motion for a new trial was made in term, and it was by consent that the simultaneous filing of the brief of evidence was dispensed with. The order taken in term to hear the motion in vacation, put the judge in full possession of the case at the time appointed, and continuances from time to time were had, so that there was no gap or break. It was as if the first day had...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP