Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

206 Ga. 524

Murphey v. Brock

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided February 15, 1950

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1950-02-15

Relies on Anderson v. Beasley · Murphey v. Brock · Green v. Green

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1950-02-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2003

1 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

40195019601970198019902000decided

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 →

Candler, Justice.

¶1When, this litigation was here before in Murphey v. Brock, 206 Ga. 9 (55 S. E. 2d, 564), we substantially modified the judgment then complained of, as our opinion clearly shows, and on the return of the remittitur to the trial court, the judgment of that court was accordingly amended; but the costs of bringing the case to this court, and those accruing here, were taxed against the plaintiff in error. That judgment is directly excepted to on the ground that the court erroneously fixed the costs; the contention being that the judgment for such costs should have been against the defendants in error. Held:

¶21. For the reason assigned, the judgment complained of is unquestionably erroneous. This court has consistently and quite frequently held that, where the plaintiff in error obtains, as he concededly did in this case, a substantial modification of the judgment complained of, he is entitled to have a judgment against the opposite party for the costs of bringing the case to this court for review and those accruing here. Green v. Green, 138 Ga. 581 (75 S. E. 603); Anderson v. Beasley, 169 Ga. 720 (151 S. E. 360); Ball v. Moore, 181 Ga. 146 (182 S. E. 28); Ross v. Rambo, 195 Ga. 100 (23 S. E. 2d, 687).

¶32.. Since the costs in question were improperly taxed against the plaintiff in error, the judgment complained of must be amended by taxing them against the defendants in error, and the trial judge is directed to do so.

¶4Judgment reversed with direction.

All the Justices concur.
/206/ga/524 · .json · Public domain