Dannelly v. Speer

Decided August 15, 1849

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1849-08-15

A motion was made to dismiss this writ of error, among other grounds, because the plaintiff in error had voluntarily dismissed his cause after the making of the decisions by the Court below complained of and excepted to.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1943

1 state decisions

Relies on Kelsey v. Ross · Planters' Bank v. Scott · High v. Taylor

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1849-08-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 *228By the Court. —

Nisbet, J.

¶2[1.] If aplaintiff dismissesliis action there is no case in Court— nothing upon which our judgment could operate, if we should hold that there is error; and if we should affirm, so far as the case is concerned, it would be supererogatory. The plaintiff could have excepted to the opinions when given by the Court below, which he says constrained him to dismiss, and gone on to trial. He could have appealed and excepted on the appeal. A writ of error will not lie from a voluntary nonsuit. Union Bank vs. Carr, 2 Humph. 345. 3 How. Miss. 332. Trice vs. Smith, 6 Yerg. 319. Howell vs. Pitman, 5 Miss. 246. Atkinson vs. Lane, 7 Miss. 403. Kelvy vs. Ross, 6 Blackf. 536. Vestall vs. Burditt, 6 Blackf. 555.

¶3Note. — See ante, Mott vs. Hill’s adm’r, p. 79, — [Rep.]