Carhart v. Mackle
Decision Date | 15 July 1920 |
Docket Number | 11342. |
Parties | CARHART v. MACKLE ET AL. |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
Counsel for plaintiff in error having specifically abandoned in their brief the second count of the petition, no question relating to that count will be considered by this court.
"Exceptions pendente lite, though duly approved and ordered filed as a part of the record, upon which no error was originally assigned in the main bill of exceptions, and upon which counsel made no assignment before the argument of the case will not be considered by this court."
Error from City Court of Atlanta; H. M. Reid, Judge.
Action by R. A. Carhart against F. E. Mackle and another. General demurrer to a count of a petition sustained, and a special demurrer to another count thereof sustained, and plaintiff brings error. Writ of error dismissed.
Moore & Pomeroy and Coles & Savage, all of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Norman I. Miller, of Atlanta, for defendants in error.
The bill of exceptions, which was certified by the presiding judge on the 16th day of February, 1920, in so far as it relates to count 1 of the petition (the only count relied on in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error), is as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial