Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp.
| Decision Date | 01 October 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 21775,21775 |
| Citation | 218 Ga. 352,127 S.E.2d 898 |
| Parties | W. G. HARRY v. SCENIC HEIGHTS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
A. B. Parker, Carrollton, for plaintiff in error.
George C. Kennedy, Manchester, W. S. Allen, Greenville, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
W. G. Harry filed an ejectment suit in fictitious form against Scenic Heights Development Corporation in the Meriwether Superior Court on March 7, 1962. Defendant Scenic was served on March 8, 1962, but made no appearance nor filed any answer. On May 10, 1962, the Judge of Meriwether Superior Court issued an order declaring the matter in default. On May 15, 1962, the defendant filed a motion to vacate said order, to which motion the plaintiff Harry filed his written demurrers, both general and special. The trial judge overruled the demurrers and the plaintiff excepted. HELD:
Where a demurrer to a motion to open or vacate an entry of default is overruled, a direct bill of exceptions to such ruling is prematurely brought and this court is without jurisdiction to entertain it. Ryles v. Moore, 191 Ga. 661, 662, 13 S.E.2d 672. See Denmark v. Denmark, 83 Ga.App. 532, 64 S.E.2d 201, and Hope v. Hudgins, 98 Ga.App. 856, 107 S.E.2d 252. This not being a final judgment as defined by Code Ann. § 6-701 (Ga.L.1890-1891, p. 82; Ga.L.1946, pp. 726, 730; Ga.L.1953, Nov.Sess., pp. 440, 455; Ga.L.1957, pp. 224, 230), the motion by the defendant Scenic to dismiss the writ of error on that ground must prevail.
Bill of exceptions dismissed.
All the Justices concur.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scenic Heights Development Corp. v. Harry
...Opinion by the Court DUCKWORTH, Chief Justice. This is the third appearance of this case in this court. See Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp., 218 Ga. 352, 127 S.E.2d 898, and Scenic Heights Development Corporation v. Harry, 218 Ga. 695, 130 S.E.2d 215. This court in the latter case......
-
Nye v. Murcel Mfg. Co.
...in the case was not itself final and could not be the basis of an appeal under Code Ann. § 6-701. See Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp., 218 Ga. 352, 127 S.E.2d 898 et cit. It is contended that the appeal in this case, which is based on the overruling of a general demurrer to motion......
-
Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp., 22709
...Justice. 1. This court has considered previous litigation between the parties in the present case. See Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp., 218 Ga. 352, 127 S.E.2d 898; Scenic Heights Development Corp. v. Harry, 218 Ga. 695, 130 S.E.2d 215; Scenic Heights Development Corp. v. Harry, 2......
-
Bouldin v. Mote, 51268
...of defensive pleadings is not final. Nye v. Murcel Manufacturing Company, 116 Ga.App. 44, 156 S.E.2d 383; Harry v. Scenic Heights Development Corp., 218 Ga. 352, 127 S.E.2d 898. The judgment not being final and no certificate of immediate review being presented, this appeal must be Appeal d......