Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

NALLEY v. AIKEN et al.

QUILLIAN, Judge.

The plaintiff filed a claim against the defendant to recover attorney's fees. Prior to the trial the defendant filed a motion to stay the proceedings. After a hearing thereon Judge Webb of the Civil Court of Fulton County overruled the motion. An appeal was taken from that order and this court held that the appeal was premature. Nalley v. Aiken, 119 Ga. App. 406 ( 167 S.E.2d 239).

Upon the trial of the case before Judge Tidwell, sitting without intervention of a jury, defendant's counsel stated that he continued to urge his position on the motion to stay. However, at the conclusion of the trial on May 19, 1969, Judge Tidwell declined to rule on the question of the motion to stay stating: "On October 23, 1968, defendant, C. V. Nalley, Jr., filed a `Motion to Stay' which was overruled and denied by an order of the Honorable James E. Webb, dated October 28, 1968. The basis of plaintiff's `Motion to Stay' was an alleged settlement of the above styled case. In my opinion, the order of Judge Webb determined such contentions adversely to the defendant and I am bound by that determination. The defendant has continued to urge that the plaintiff's claim has been settled, but, for the foregoing reasons, I have declined to make an independent determination of same but have merely followed the ruling of Judge Webb dated October 28, 1968."

The effect of Judge Tidwell's order was to leave Judge Webb's order in full force and effect. Held:

The appellant enumerates as error Judge Tidwell's order of May 19, 1969. However, there is no enumeration of error on Judge Webb's order. Judge Webb's order remaining in effect and being unappealed from is binding on this court. Hill v. Willis, 224 Ga. 263 ( 161 S.E.2d 281); Reames v. Commercial Credit Corp., 117 Ga. App. 786 ( 161 S.E.2d 923).

The remaining enumerations of error, not having been argued, were abandoned.

Judgment affirmed. Pannell and Evans, JJ., concur.

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 12, 1969 — DECIDED OCTOBER 22, 1969.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

NALLEY v. AIKEN
(Oct 22, 1969)