Burkhalter v. Durrence

Decision Date15 February 1956
Docket NumberNo. 1,No. 36052,36052,1
Citation93 Ga.App. 374,91 S.E.2d 774
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals
PartiesE. M. BURKHALTER v. D. L. DURRENCE, Sr

H. H. Elders, Reidsville, for plaintiff in error.

J. Max Cheney, Reidsville, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

QUILLIAN, Judge.

When counsel goes to trial without the presence of the defendant, but makes no motion for a continuance nor suggests his desire to have his client present at the trial, it will not require the granting of a new trial. This is true even though the defendant contends he possesses evidence which would have brought the trial to a different conclusion. 'There is full power on the part of the counsel to represent the client, and it is just the same as if the client were there in person * * *.' Williams v. Simmons, 79 Ga. 649, 654, 7 S.E. 133, 135. The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. Denmond v. Hillyer, 129 Ga. 698, 59 S.E. 806; McAnally v. Bank of Abbeville, 22 Ga.App. 178, 95 S.E. 737.

Judgment affirmed.

NICHOLS, J., concurs.

FELTON, C. J., concurs in the judgment.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • In re Estate of Coutermarsh
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • December 5, 2013
    ...363 S.E.2d 553 (1988) (trial court erred in sanctioning defendant for failing to appear in person at trial); Burkhalter v. Durrence, 93 Ga.App. 374, 374–375, 91 S.E.2d 774 (1956) (physical precedent only) (trial court did not err in allowing trial to proceed where counsel was present but no......
  • Chapman v. Avco Financial Services Leasing Co., A89A1233
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • October 10, 1989
    ...a civil action may choose not to be present at the trial of the case and to be represented solely by counsel. See Burkhalter v. Durrence, 93 Ga.App. 374, 91 S.E.2d 774 (1956). However, in this case defendant did exercise his right to be present by appearing with his counsel in the courtroom......
  • Bembry v. Pugh
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 1988
    ...to a different conclusion.... The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. [Cits.]" Burkhalter v. Durrence, 93 Ga.App. 374, 374-375, 91 S.E.2d 774 (1956). Judgment BANKE, P.J., and BENHAM, J., concur. ...

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