Fielder v. Collier
| Decision Date | 31 July 1853 |
| Docket Number | No. 73.,73. |
| Citation | 13 Ga. 495 |
| Parties | Fielder, Brothers & Co., plaintiffs in error. vs. William E. Collier, defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Motion to dismiss writ of error.
Issue was joined in this case, under protestation, and a motion made to dismiss the writ of error, upon the following grounds:
1st. Because the brief of testimony is not embodied in the bill of exceptions.
2d. Because it does not appear by the Clerk's certificate, or in any other way, that the entire bill of exceptions was filed in the Clerk's office within ten days after the Judge's certificate, or that it ever was filed in said office.
3d. Because the bill of exceptions, citation, writ of error, and notice, were not filed in the Clerk's office within the time prescribed by law.
H. Morgan and David A. Vason, for the motion.
Lyon & Clark, contra.
By the Court.—Lumpkin, J., delivering the opinion.
A motion is made to dismiss the writ of error in this case, upon the grounds: 1st. Because the brief of the testimony is not embodied in the bill of exceptions.
It is not necessary that this should be done. Carey, Assignee, &c, vs. Giles, Receiver, (10 Ga. R. 1.) The testimony referred to in the objection are copies of certain interrogatories, which were read on the trial of the cause in the Court below. They are appended to the bill of exceptions, and referred to as exhibits, "marked A, B and C, and certified by the presiding Judge." On each of the exhibits thus attached, is the name of "William C. Perkins, J. S. C. S. W. C." officially endorsed by himself. This is sufficient evidence of the identity of these documents.
2dly and 3dly. Because it does not appear by the Clerk's certificate, or in any other way, that the bill of exceptions, writ of error, citation and notice, were filed in the Clerk's office within the time prescribed by law; or that they ever were filed in said office.
It appears by an inspection of the record, that the bill of exceptions was certified and signed by the presiding Judge on the 30th day of May, 1853; and that the bill of exceptions, writ of error, citation and notice, were all duly filed in the Clerk's office of the Superior Court of Lee County, on the 3d day of June, 1853.
Motion refused.
EXHIBIT TO BILL, OF EXCEPTIONS—IDENTIFICATION OF. ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mo., K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Davis
...Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co., 138 N.C. 42, 50 S.E. 452, 107 Am. St. Rep. 517; Donovan v. Ry. Co., 158 Mass. 450, 33 N.E. 583; Fielder v. Collier, 13 Ga. 495. An examination of these authorities discloses that they support the doctrine that where an entry is made by one person in the reg......
-
Roberts v. Ctty Of Cairo
...the same. Such identification, strictly speaking, was requisite, even before the rule called for it in express terms." [Fielder Bros. & Co. v. Collier] 13 Ga. 495." In Morgan v. Twitty, 64 Ga. 426, it was held that affidavits used on the hearing of an application for injunction constitute n......
-
Roberts v. City of Cairo
...upon the same. Such identification, strictly speaking, was requisite, even before the rule called for it in express terms. [Fielder Bros. & Co. v. Collier] 13 Ga. 495." Morgan v. Twitty, 64 Ga. 426, it was held that affidavits used on the hearing of an application for injunction constitute ......
-
Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. v. Davis
...Co. v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co., 138 N.C. 42, 50 S.E. 452, 107 Am. St. Rep. 517; Donovan v. Ry. Co., 158 Mass. 450, 33 N.E. 583; Fielder v. Collier, 13 Ga. 495. examination of these authorities discloses that they support the doctrine that where an entry is made by one person in the regula......