Bradley v. Simpson, 27397.

• Decision Date: 05 December 1939
• Docket Number: No. 27397.,27397.
• Citation: 6 S.E.2d 424
• Parties: BRADLEY. v. SIMPSON, Solicitor General.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

6 S.E.2d 424

BRADLEY.

v.SIMPSON, Solicitor General.

No. 27397.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

Dec. 5, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 19, 1939.

Syllabus by the Court.

The court did not err in adjudging the respondent to be in contempt of court.

Error from Superior Court, Jackson County; Clifford Pratt, Judge.

Proceeding by Frank Simpson, as Solicitor General of Piedmont Circuit, to set aside orders admitting certain persons to the practice of law, wherein J. D. Bradley was subpoenaed to testify as a witness.

To review a judgment adjudging the witness in contempt, the witness brings error.

Affirmed, conforming to mandate of the Supreme Court in 5 S.E.2d 893, reversing on certiorari a judgment in 59 Ga.App. 844, 2 S.E.2d 238.

G. Seals Aiken, J. Ira Harrelson, and Bradley & Bradley, all of Atlanta, Joe Quillian, of Winder, and Randall Evans, Jr., of Thomson, for plaintiff in error.

Walter McElreath and Wm. A. Fuller, both of Atlanta, and B. Frank Simpson, Sol. Gen., of Norcross, for defendant in error

FELTON, Judge.

1. The Supreme Court, on certiorari, reversed the judgment of this court rendered in this case, Bradley v. Simpson ex rel. Georgia Bar Ass'n, 59 Ga.App. 844, 2 S.E. 2d 238, in its judgment, Simpson, sol. gen., ex rel., v. Bradley, 5 S.E.2d 893. The judgment of this court is hereby vacated and the judgment of the Supreme Court on the question involved in its judgment is hereby made the judgment of this court.

2. There is no merit in the contention that the respondent was justified in refusing to answer certain questions on the ground that the answers would tend to incriminate him. Regardless of what the answers to the questions would have been, if they had been responsive to the questions they would not have incriminated the respondent.

3. There is no merit in the contention that the judge of the superior court of Jackson County did not have jurisdiction to try the respondent for refusing to testify before a commissioner in DeKalb County, the residence of respondent. The contempt proceeding was not such a case as is contemplated by law in the provision that the venue shall be in the county where an offense was committed or in the county of the residence of the respondent. In such cases the jurisdiction of the court trying the case in which evidence is taken by depositions extends to every person in the State whose testimony is being taken by deposition and to every county wherein such testimony is being taken. Bilbo v. Bilbo, 167 Ga. 602,...