¶1Where a mandamus nisi has been issued to the judge of a city court, requiring him to show cause why he should not sign and certify a bill of exceptions, and in his answer he states that he declined to sign and certify the same because the statement of facts therein was not true, and, although he had returned the same to the attorney tendering it, with his objections thereto in writing, that these objections had not been satisfactorily met and removed, the rule will be discharged, as the answer can not be .traversed. Civil Code, §5545; Platen v. Adams, 72 Ga. 199. Rule discharged.
6 Ga. App. 747
Webster v. Griffin
Decided October 5, 1909
Court of Appeals of Georgia · decided 1909-10-05
<p>Application for mandamus.</p>
Relies on Platen v. Adams
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1909-10-05
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently June 1962
4 state decisions
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 →