63 Ga. 345 (Ga. 1879), Lee v. Porter

Citation63 Ga. 345
Opinion JudgeBLECKLEY, Justice.
Party NameLEE v. PORTER, surviving partner.
AttorneyEMMETT WOMACK, for plaintiff in error. CLARK & PACE; H. K. MCCAY, for defendant.
Judge Panel[WARNER, Chief Justice,
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

Page 345

63 Ga. 345 (Ga. 1879)

LEE

v.

PORTER, surviving partner.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

September, 1879

[WARNER, Chief Justice, being engaged in presiding over the senate organized as a court of impeachment, did not sit in this case.]

1. Where, by consent of parties, a cause involving both law and fact is tried by the judge without a jury, and the judgment is excepted to generally, with no specification as to whether the error intended to be alleged was a mistaken finding on the facts, or an erroneous ruling upon some point of law, a copy of the documentary evidence as well as a brief of the oral evidence must be brought up. It is not enough that the bill of exceptions represents that certain writings, such as exemplifications from other courts, showed so and so, not reciting the contents but only stating the supposed legal effect.

Bill of exceptions. Evidence. Practice in the Supreme Court. September Term, 1879.

Reported in the decision.

EMMETT WOMACK, for plaintiff in error.

CLARK & PACE; H. K. MCCAY, for defendant.

BLECKLEY, Justice.

In the court below, this was a rule for the distribution of money. The parties to the present writ of error were competing creditors, each claiming a judgment lien upon the fund. The issue as to both law and fact was, by consent, tried by the court without a jury, and the judgment is excepted to generally, with no specification as to whether the error intended to be alleged was a mistaken finding upon the facts, or an erroneous ruling on some point of law. A material part of the evidence was documentary, such as exemplifications from the records of other courts, and no copy of the documents is brought up, nor does any recital of their contents appear. The bill of exceptions merely represents that this and that writing showed so and so, stating the supposed legal effect, but not in a way to enable this court to determine for itself what conclusions ought to have been drawn from them. At the call of the case here, the defendant in error moved to dismiss the writ of error for this deficiency in the record. The assignment of error being general, we cannot review the judgment without going into the facts, just as the court below did. For this purpose we ought to have the evidence, and not merely the inferences which the counsel for the plaintiff in error, with the judge's sanction, drew from it in preparing the bill of exceptions. It may be that we would draw very different...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Raise Your Standards: A Practitioner's Guide to the Effective Use of Appellate Standards of Review.
    • United States
    • Florida Bar Journal Vol. 92 Nbr. 9, November 2018
    • 1 Noviembre 2018
    ...The Tipsy Coachman Doctrine --The Tipsy Coachman doctrine first appeared in the 1879 opinion of the Georgia Supreme Court in Lee v. Porter, 63 Ga. 345 (1879), which states that if the trial court reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons, it will be upheld if there is any basis th......
  • To Err Is Human, But The Tipsy Coachman Rule Can Get The Trial Judge Home
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 16 Septiembre 2018
    ...It appears to have first been used in a reported judicial decision in this country in the 1879 Georgia decision in Lee v. Porter, 63 Ga. 345 (1879).2 In the poem, the coachman is tipsy but the horse, nonetheless, gets him The Georgia court leads into its quote of the poem by saying, "T......
  • New Twists On Florida’s ‘Tipsy Coachman’ Doctrine
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 27 Agosto 2013
    ...Still aiming at honour, yet fearing to roam, The coachman was tipsy, the chariot drove home . . . .’” Id. at 497 (quoting Lee v. Porter, 63 Ga. 345 (1879)). The Supreme Court of Georgia opinion that originally quoted Oliver Goldsmith’s poem also remarked: “It not infrequently happens that a......
2 firm's commentaries
  • To Err Is Human, But The Tipsy Coachman Rule Can Get The Trial Judge Home
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • 16 Septiembre 2018
    ...It appears to have first been used in a reported judicial decision in this country in the 1879 Georgia decision in Lee v. Porter, 63 Ga. 345 (1879).2 In the poem, the coachman is tipsy but the horse, nonetheless, gets him The Georgia court leads into its quote of the poem by saying, "T......
  • New Twists On Florida’s ‘Tipsy Coachman’ Doctrine
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • 27 Agosto 2013
    ...Still aiming at honour, yet fearing to roam, The coachman was tipsy, the chariot drove home . . . .’” Id. at 497 (quoting Lee v. Porter, 63 Ga. 345 (1879)). The Supreme Court of Georgia opinion that originally quoted Oliver Goldsmith’s poem also remarked: “It not infrequently happens that a......
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT