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

HARDY et al. v. D. G. MACHINERY GAGE COMPANY.

UNDERCOFLER, Justice.

The writ of certiorari was granted in this case to review the ruling of the Court of Appeals which held that the motion to dismiss the appeal in that court on the ground that the transcript was not filed within thirty days of the filing of the notice of appeal as required by Code Ann. § 6-806 (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 26) or within any extension of time obtained under Code Ann. § 6-804 (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 21) was without merit in view of the 1968 addition of Paragraph (d) to Section 13 of the Appellate Practice Act of 1965 (Ga. L. 1968, pp. 1072, 1073, Sec. 2; Code Ann. § 6-809 (d)). D. G. Machinery Gage Co. v. Hardy, 118 Ga. App. 45 (1) ( 162 S.E.2d 852).

Under the ruling of this court in Fahrig v. Garrett, 224 Ga. 817, the motion to dismiss the appeal should have been granted.

Judgment reversed. All the Justices concur.

ARGUED NOVEMBER 13, 1968 — DECIDED NOVEMBER 21, 1968 — REHEARING DENIED DECEMBER 5, 1968.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

HARDY v. D. G. MACHINERY GAGE COMPANY
(Nov 21, 1968)