Warren v. Blevins
| Decision Date | 30 July 1894 |
| Parties | WARREN . v. BLEVINS. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Writ of Error—When Lies.
Where, in an action for the recovery of land, the parties went to trial, not upon the whole case, but upon the single question of the jurisdiction of the court, the same depending upon whether any part of the premises lay in the county in which the action was brought, and the jury found in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant, without making a motion for a new trial, brought a writ of error upon various rulings of the court made during the progress of the trial, the reversal of none of which would operate to terminate the case, but would leave it still pending in the court below, the writ of error was premature, and for that reason is dismissed, with direction that the plaintiff in error be allowed to enter his bill of exceptions on the minutes of the court below as exceptions taken pendente lite.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from superior court, Dade county; T. W. Milner, Judge.
Action in ejectment by.T. W. Blevins against W. L. Warren. From a judgment on the trial of a preliminary question as to jurisdiction, defendant brings error. Dismissed.
H. P. Lumpkin and R. J. & J. McCamy. for plaintiff in error.
McCutchen & Shumate, for defendant in error.
An action of ejectment was brought by Blevins against Warren in the superior court of Dade county. The defendant filed a plea alleging that the court had no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of the suit, for the reason that the land sued for lay in Walker county, and that the superior court of that county alone had jurisdiction of the case. The parties went to trial upon the single question of the jurisdiction of the court, and upon this issue the jury found for the plaintiff, but there was no recovery by him of the premises in dispute, and for this reason the main case is still pending in the court below. Without moving for a new trial, the defendant sued out a bill of exceptions, alleging error upon various rulings made by the court during the progress of the trial. After a careful examination of these rulings, we find that the reversal of none of them would operate to make a final termination of the case. For this reason, the writ of error, under section 4250 of the Code, was prematurely brought, and must be dismissed. For the purpose, however, of allowing the defendant to take advantage of the exceptions he has made, in the event it should in the end become necessary for him to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Douglas v. Hardin, (No. 5422.)
...Case. But even prior to that time, in Ross v. Mercer, 115 Ga. 353; 41 S. E. 594, Mr. Presiding Justice Lumpkin, citing Warren v. Blevins, 94 Ga. 215, 21 S. E. 459, pointed out the reason why a judgment merely affecting the plea of the defendant is not a final disposition of a cause. He said......
-
Robinson v. State
... ... allow him to enter it on the minutes of the court below as an ... exception taken pendente lite, and we so do. Warren v ... Blevins, 94 Ga. 215, 21 S.E. 459; Williams v. State, ... Ga.App., 4 S.E.2d 719, decided this day ... Writ of ... error ... ...
-
Smith v. Estes
...collateral issue was raised, for the main case would still be pending until a final judgmentshould be entered therein. Warren v. Blevins, 94 Ga. 215, 21 S. E. 459; Ross v. Mercer, 115 Ga. 353, 41 S. E. 594; State Mutual Life Association v. Kemp, 115 Ga. 355, 41 S. E. 652. Under the facts of......
-
Robinson v. State
...made and to allow him to enter it on the minutes of the court below as an exception taken pendente lite, and we so do. Warren v. Blevins, 94 Ga. 215, 21 S.E. 459; Williams v. State, Ga.App., 4 S.E.2d 719, decided this day. Writ of error dismissed, with direction. GUERRY, J., concurs. BROYLE......