Myers v. Wright
Decision Date | 12 June 1924 |
Docket Number | 4008. |
Citation | 123 S.E. 740,158 Ga. 418 |
Parties | MYERS v. WRIGHT. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
The first ground of the motion for new trial complains that the court below erred in admitting in evidence, over objection, a certified copy of the adjudication as a bankrupt of J. H Myers & Son, a partnership composed of J. H. Myers and Jesse Myers, as a partnership and individually, which copy was certified by the referee in bankruptcy as custodian of the matter; the objection being that the certificate is not signed by the proper authority, that is, Held, that the admission of such evidence is not error for the reason assigned. McLanahan v. Blackwell, 119 Ga. 64, 45 S.E. 785; 1 Collier on Bankruptcy (12th Ed.), 509 (a); Bank of Manchester v. Birmingham Trust, etc., Co., 156 Ga. 486, 119 S.E. 603.
On the trial of the case counsel for plaintiff propounded to T. E Wright, the plaintiff, the following question: "What, if anything, did you hear him [J. H. Myers] say under his oath there with reference to the manner in which he had sold this land that is in controversy here in this litigation, and his having the right to repurchase it within five years, if you heard him say anything to that effect?" This above question referred to the testimony delivered by J. H. Myers when he was examined at a creditors' meeting before the referee in bankruptcy. Counsel for movant objected as follows: The court ruled as follows "J. H. Myers is a party, and it would be admissible against him." Counsel for movant, objecting further, said: Whereupon the witness testified as follows: Held, that this question and answer was not error, it appearing that J. H. Myers remained in possession after the sale, nor for the reason assigned, that the issue on trial was between the plaintiff and W. A. Myers, and any statement that J. H. Myers, the codefendant, made at any time in the absence of W. A. Myers could not be admitted so as to affect W. A. Myers' title. Banks v. McCandless, 119 Ga. 793, 795, 47 S.E. 332.
Error is assigned in the third ground of the motion for new trial, because the court admitted in evidence the original petition of J. H. Myers & Son, together with a schedule of assets and liabilities filed in the United States court for the Northern District of Georgia, to be adjudged a voluntary bankrupt. Movant objected to this evidence, on the ground that it is not a transcript from the record of the United States court, and because it is the original petition, and not a proper transcript and under the seal of the clerk of that court. Held, that the admission of this evidence was not error, it being admitted that the record offered in evidence was the original. Rogers v. Tillman, 72 Ga. 479.
The refusal of the court to direct a verdict for either party is not cause for a new trial.
The court charged the jury...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Greenberg v. Rothberg
...has no seal, it is not error to admit in evidence an original ordinance, where it is admitted to be such, " citing Myers v. Wright, 158 Ga. 418, 419, 123 S.E. 740; Rogers v. Tillman, 72 Ga. 479. See in this connection Western & A. R. Co. v. Hix, 104 Ga. 11, 30 S.E. 424; Western & A. R. Co. ......
-
Greenberg v. Rothberg
...it is not error to admit in evidence an original ordinance, where it is admitted to be such,' citing Myers v. Wright, 158 Ga. 418, 419, 123 S.E. 740; Rogers v. Tillman, 72 Ga. See in this connection Western & A. R. Co. v. Hix, 104 Ga. 11, 30 S.E. 424; Western & A. R. Co. v. Peterson, 168 Ga......
- Myers v. Wright, (No. 4008.)