Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

161 Ga. 556

Cady v. Cady

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided January 13, 1926

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1926-01-13

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“To give this court jurisdiction, the judge’s certificate to the bill of exceptions must state that it is true; and for lack of such certification the bill of exceptions will be dismissed.” Cady v. Cady, 161 Ga. 556 ( 131 S. E. 282 ); Code, §§ 6-806, 6-808. The certificate to the bill of exceptions begins as follows:”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 66 Ga. App. 254 - Jones v. Pierce

Relies on Hill v. Cox · Lee v. Tucker · Wadley v. Oertel

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1926-01-13

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently September 1957

14 state decisions

701926193019401950decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hines, J.

¶11. To give this court jurisdiction, the judge’s certificate to the bill of exceptions must state that it is true; and for lack of such certification the bill of exceptions will be dismissed. Lawrence v. Monticello, 65 Ga. 298; Parmelee v. Savannah &c. Ry., 72 Ga. 216; American Freehold &c. Co. v. Candler, 80 Ga. 366 (10 S. E. 111); Cade v. DuBose, 125 Ga. 832 (54 S. E. 697); Binyard v. State, 126 Ga. 635 (55 S. E. 498); Grant v. Derrick, 130 Ga. 43 (60 S. E. 157); Prater v. Prater, 140 Ga. 326 (78 S. E. 1008); Houston v. Postell, 141 Ga. 792 (82 S. E. 148); Cartledge v. Ashford, 148 Ga. 589 (97 S. E. 521); Bugg v. Hughs, 151 Ga. 599 (107 S. E. 860); Rountree v. Gibbs, 156 Ga. 170 (118 S. E. 654).

¶22. This is not such a “want of technical conformity to the statutes or rules regulating the practice in carrying eases to” this court as comes within the scope of the act of Dec. IS, 1893 (Acts 1893, p. 52), now embodied in the Civil Code (1910), § 6147; and this statute will not prevent the *557dismissal of the bill of exceptions for the lack of such certification. Rountree v. Gibbs, supra.

No. 5114.January 13, 1926.Maddox, Maddox & Mitchell, for plaintiff.William K. & Gordon Mann, for defendant.

¶3Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.
/161/ga/556 · .json · Public domain