Arnold v. Hall

Decided April 24, 1883

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1883-04-24

New Trial. Practice in Superior Court. Attorneys. Rules of Court. Before Judge Pottle. Elbert Superior Court. September Term, 1882. Arnold brought complaint for land against Mrs. Hall. Other defendants were added by amendment. Plaintiff recovered a verdict. Defendants moved for a new trial, because the verdict was 'contrary to law, evidence and the charge of the court. This occurred in Elbert superior court, at the September term, 1882.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1883-04-24

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 1909

5 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 →

Jackson, Chief Justice.

¶11. The motion for a new trial should have been dismissed. The parties were allowed until the 3d Monday in October, 1882, to perfect the motion by making out and filing a brief of the testimony. The 3d Monday in October was the 16th of that month. Nothing was done until the 20th of the month. It was too late to perfebt the motion. 5 Ga., 333; 59 Ga., 626; Usry vs. Phillips, 68 Ga., 815; McGord vs. Harden, ex'r, 69 Ga., 747; 65 Ga., 20.

¶2 *4472. No consent of counsel will- be enforced unless in writing. The consent was in parol and disputed. The court could not enforce it legally, but was bound by the rule. 20 Rule Superior Court; Code, §204.

¶3Judgment reversed.