Townsend v. Davis
| Decision Date | 31 March 1846 |
| Docket Number | No. 71.,71. |
| Citation | 1 Ga. 495 |
| Parties | Townsend and Brothers, plaintiffs in error. vs. James M. Davis, defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
The defendant in error had sued out an attachment against John B. Davis, predicated upon a note due the Central Rank of Georgia, of which the said John B. Davis was maker, and the defendant in error the last endorser: the said John B, Davis having moved out of the State, and the defendant in error having been sued as said last endorser, and judgment rendered against him.
The case founded upon this attachment came on to be tried on the appeal before Judge Floyd, in the Superior Court of Houston County, at April term, 1846. when counsel for the plaintiffs in error, Townsend and Brothers, being attaching creditors of said John B. Davis, whose attachment was junior in point of time to the attachment sued out by the defendant in error, were, at their request, permitted by the court below to appear as amici curiae in defence of said John B. Davis who himself had not appeared, nor had any replevy been made so as to authorize any defence in his name.
The counsel for Townsend and Brothers, so permitted as aforesaid to appear as amici curiae. proceeded on the trial to make various points, and to take several exceptions to the attachment in said case, all of which were overruled by the court below. Whereupon the said counsel as amici curiae excepted, and assigned error in the decisions of the court below. In overruling the several points made by them.
The points decided by the court, and the grounds of error are omitted, as they were not adjudicated by the Supreme Court.
The counsel for the defendant in error joined issue upon the assignment of error with a protestando, reserving the right to move to dismiss the writ of error, on the ground that the plaintiffs in error were not parties to the record, nor a fleeted by the judgment rendered in the court below, and that the counsel for the plaintiffs in error, as amici curias, had no right to except to the judgment of the court below, nor to sue out any writ of error in the premises.
Amos W. Hammond and William W. Arnold, for the plaintiffs in error.
Samuel D. Killen, for the defendant in error.
By the. Court— Nisbet, Judge.
Upon the trial of this attachment below, Messrs. Hammond and Arnold, who were counsel for Townsend and Brothers, being also attaching creditors of John B. Davis, were permitted to appear as amici curiae in defence of John B. Davis. As friends...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
St. Louis & San Francisco Ry. Co. v. Evans & Howard Fire Brick Co.
...brought only by the party who has been aggrieved by the judgment.” Alling v. Shelton, 16 Conn. 436; Howse v. Judson, 1 Fla. 133; Townsend v. Davis, 1 Ga. 495; Tey's case, 5 Rep. *38; Medina v. Stoughton, 1 Ld. Raym. 593; William v. Gwyn, 2 Saund. R. 42, o, case 4, at p. 46, b. c. n. (6); Hu......
-
H. W. Brown Transp. Co. v. Edgeworth
...which one alleged joint tort-feasor and the insurance carrier are seeking to compel the other tort-feasor to remain in the case. Townsend v. Davis, 1 Ga. 495, sets forth the proposition that a party not aggrieved is without legal right to except to this court. See, in this connection, Moore......
-
Whitby v. Maloy, s. 55356-55358
...are dismissed. Coogler v. Berry, 117 Ga.App. 614, 161 S.E.2d 428; Holland v. Froklis, 89 Ga.App. 768(1), 81 S.E.2d 317; Townsend and Brothers v. Davis, 1 Ga. 495, 496. Case no. 55356 reversed; Case nos. 55357 and 55358 QUILLIAN, P. J., and WEBB, J., concur. ...
-
Cannon v. Whiddon
...position in the trial court by appearing and resisting the suit as indicated in the preceding note. Code, § 6-1202; Townsend v. Davis, 1 Ga. 495(2), 44 Am.Dec. 675; Swift v. Thomas, 101 Ga. 89(2), 28 S.E. Turner v. Newell, 129 Ga. 89, 58 S.E. 657; Bank of Covington v. Cannon, 133 Ga. 779, 6......