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

ROWE v. JOHNSON; and

WORRILL, J.

1. An order sustaining certain special demurrers to the petition and limiting the action to one arising ex contractu, which left the suit pending in the lower court, was not a final judgment from which a direct bill of exceptions would lie. Harrell v. Southern Ry. Co., 13 Ga. App. 409 ( 79 S.E. 240); Woodland v. Woodland, 33 Ga. App. 167 ( 125 S.E. 732); Joyner v. Hamilton, 79 Ga. App. 106 ( 53 S.E.2d 133); Fickett v. Fuller, 171 Ga. 190 ( 154 S.E. 784). The main bill of exceptions was, therefore prematurely sued out, and must be dismissed.

2. Where the cross-bill of exceptions was not tendered within twenty days from the date of the order complained of, even though such order would have been a final order had it been rendered as contended by the plaintiff in error in such cross-bill, but was tendered within the time allowed by law for cross-bills of exceptions, it came too late to be treated as a main bill of exceptions, and since the main bill of exceptions has been dismissed, the cross-bill must likewise be dismissed. Perdue v. Anderson, 137 Ga. 512 (2) ( 73 S.E. 1050).

Main bill and cross-bill of exceptions dismissed. Sutton, C. J., and Felton, J., concur.

DECIDED APRIL 22, 1953 — REHEARING DENIED MAY 13, 1953.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

ROWE v. JOHNSON
(Apr 22, 1953)