Woolfolk v. Gunn
| Decision Date | 31 January 1872 |
| Citation | 45 Ga. 117 |
| Parties | THOMAS J. WOOLFOLK et al., plaintiffs in error. v. DANIEL F. GUNN, defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
*Amendment. Practice. Bankruptcy. Tried before Judge Cole. Bibb Superior Court. April Term, 1871.
This was a motion by Thomas J. Woolfolk, James H. Woolfolk and John W. Woolfolk, security, to set aside a judgment obtained in said Court, at May Term, 1869, in favor of Daniel F. Gunn, guardian, etc., against them and the fi. fa. issued thereon, on the grounds that said judgment and fi. fa. were not founded on any legal verdict or other legal authority, and also, that said judgment and fi. fa. were not on the minutes or records of this Court.
At the same time and before said motion, a motion was made by the plaintiff, in said judgment and fi. fa., to enter the verdict rendered by a jury of said Court at the May Term, 1869 thereof, and on which said judgment was founded on the minutes of said Court nunc pro tunc. The motion to enter the verdict nunc pro tunc on the minutes was first taken and the first in order, there being no verdict on the minutes in said case. To this motion the said defendants, Woolfolks, made the following objections, and asked that the issues they presented be submitted to a jury for trial, to-wit:
No verdict was ever rendered in said case; the entry on the declaration, purporting to be a verdict, was in fact not a verdict of any jury of said Court duly rendered in said case.
Defendants further objected to the granting said motion, because the said James H. Woolfolk has been duly declared a bankrupt in the District Court of the United States, for the Southern District of Georgia, and proceedings are now pending in bankruptcy in said Court against him, and they claim that no judgment or order can be taken in this Court affecting him while said proceedings are pending in said Bankrupt Court. Between the term of the Court at which a verdict in said case is alleged to have been rendered, and the application to enter the same on the minutes nunc pro tunc, innocent thirdparties, to-wit: I. C. Plant & Son, and others, have obtained bona fide liens on the property of these deponents, *and innocent parties have become bona fide creditors of these deponents, on the faith of said property, and their rights may be injuriously affected by said nunc pro tunc order.
Said Court refused to allow said objections to be submitted to a jury on the issues made therein, on the ground that as it was all of recordin the Court, the Court only could decide it, and, as the papers of the Court show a verdict at the term to which it was returned, he allowed the verdict to be entered nunc pro tunc. Said motion and the said objections thereto being heard together, it was shown to the Court that there was no verdict in said case on the minutes of said Court, and the declaration (original and second originals) with the entries thereon and said verdict and judgment and fi. fa. were exhibited and read to the Court, also one entry of verdict from the Bench Docket, May Term, 1869, opposite said case in the handwriting of the Judge.
The Court, after argument, ordered and adjudged that said motion to set aside said judgment and fi. fa. be refused, and granted said motion to enter what purported by an entry on said declaration to be a verdict rendered in said case on the minutes of said Court nunc pro tunc, to which several rulings and judgments the said defendants to said judgment and fi. fa. then and there excepted.
Whittle & Gustin; Sam. Hall; Lanier & Anderson, for plaintiffs in error. Judgment can be entered only upon a verdict: R. Code, sec. 3510; 40 Ga. R., 56. The presumption is that, if what purported to be a verdict was one, it would appear on the minutes: R. Code, sec. 3700. What makes a good verdict: Bouv. L. Die, 622; 10 Bac. Abridg., 306. The Judge's entry on the docket was but a memorandum: 4 Ga. R., 157. Whether there was a verdict was a collateral issue for a jury: R. Code, sec. 3555. Bankruptcy ousted jurisdiction of State Court: Bankrupt Act 1867, sec. 21. Sections 3444 and 3449 do not cover this case. Bona *fide creditors, etc., bound by record only: 40 Ga. R., 56; 18th, 287. As to surety's risk being increased: R. Code, sec. 2126; 37 Ga. R., 428.
Jameson & Nesbit and B. & W. B. Hill, by The Reporter, for defendant. A finding, when delivered into ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
School District No. 3, In the County of Carbon v. The Western Tube Co
...the record of a criminal trial was amended so as to make it show the fact that defendant had entered a plea of not guilty. In Woolfolk v. Gunn, 45 Ga. 117, verdict that had actually been returned, but not entered, although judgment had been rendered thereon, was ordered to be entered nunc p......
-
Richards v. Mciian
...as a motion to amend a judgment. The rule is that such motion must be brought to the court wherein the judgment was rendered. Wool-folk v. Gunn, 45 Ga. 117. Ordinarily notice must be given to the adverse party; and, if he happens to reside in another county, the court by appropriate order m......
-
Richards v. McHan
... ... The ... rule is that such motion must be brought to the court wherein ... the judgment was rendered. Woolfolk v. Gunn, 45 Ga ... 117. Ordinarily notice must be given to the adverse party; ... and, if he happens to reside in another county, the court by ... ...
- Mcgehee v. Taylor