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

MOTE, by NEXT FRIEND v. SEITZ.

CANDLER, Justice.

The parties to this litigation are conterminous landowners. On the trial, they agreed and stipulated in open court that the only issue to be determined was the location of the dividing line between their respective lands; and since by that agreement and stipulation they eliminated all questions involved in the case except the one which relates only to the dividing line between their adjacent lands, the Court of Appeals and not this court has jurisdiction of the writ of error. See Whaley v. Ellis, 209 Ga. 147 ( 71 S.E.2d 209) and the cases there cited.

Transferred to the Court of Appeals. All the Justices concur.

SUBMITTED JULY 8, 1963 — DECIDED JULY 23, 1963.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MOTE v. SEITZ
(Jul 23, 1963)