Bowman v. Bowman, 20666

• Decision Date: 04 November 1959
• Docket Number: No. 20666,20666
• Citation: 215 Ga. 560,111 S.E.2d 226
• Parties: Dora Lee BOWMAN v. Joanne W. BOWMAN et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 226

111 S.E.2d 226

215 Ga. 560

Dora Lee BOWMAN v. Joanne W. BOWMAN et al.

No. 20666.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

Nov. 4, 1959.

Jas. L. Moore, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

Poole, Pearce & Hall, John J. Poole, Margaret H. Fairleigh, Atlanta, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court.

MOBLEY, Justice.

The exception is to a judgment of the Superior Court of DeKalb County sustaining a general demurrer to the petition, which sought to have declared null and void and to set aside a judgment of that court rendered on June 5, 1957, in case number 19365 of the DeKalb Superior Court, a proceeding brought by this plaintiff against this defendant, and affirmed by this court. Bowman v. Poole, 213 Ga. 867, 102 S.E.2d 561. In substance the petition alleges that the judgment of the trial court, which the plaintiff asks to be set aside, should be declared null and void and should be set aside because errors were made by the trial court in the trial of that case and by the Supreme Court in affirming the judgment of the trial court, as well as in other cases between these parties involving the real estate in controversy. Held:

The plaintiff appealed from the decree of June 5, 1957, about which he is now complaining; and this court in Bowman v. Poole, 213 Ga. 867, 102 S.E.2d 561 affirmed the judgment of the trial court. 'Under the doctrine of res judicata, a judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive between the same parties and their privies, as to all matters which were put in issue, or which under the rules of law might have been put in issue in the cause wherein the judgment was rendered, until such judgment shall be reversed or set aside. Sumner v. Sumner, 186 Ga. 390, 197 S.E. 833; Code, § 110-501.' Hubbard v. Whatley, 200 Ga. 751, 758(2), 38 S.E.2d 738, 743. Suffice it to say that all matters raised by this petition were either put in issue by the trial of the cause in which the judgment complained of was rendered or might have been put in issue in that case. As to alleged errors of this court in affirming the judgment complained of, we must reiterate what was said by this court in Lankford v. Holton, 196 Ga. 631, 633, 27 S.E.2d 310: 'All questions between parties once and finally settled by a solemn decree must be considered as an end to the litigation. They cannot be relitigated in other actions directly or indirectly. Final judgments of this court cannot be reviewed between the same parties in the superior court or on writ of error to this court. One of the prime objects of judicial procedure is to...