lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
MCDONALD v. FLETCHER.
18799.
MOBLEY, Justice.
Injunction, etc. Before Judge Thomas. Coffee Superior Court. September 10, 1954.
1. The purported brief of evidence, which has been approved by the trial judge, consists of what appears to be a complete transcript of the record of the trial in the court below. The purported brief includes motions to rule out evidence, objections to the introduction of evidence, colloquies between counsel and witnesses and between counsel and the court, arguments of counsel upon objections to the admission of evidence, and various other immaterial matters. While the stenographic report of the trial of the case, with immaterial questions and answers and parts thereof stricken, may be used in place of a brief of evidence, there has been no bona fide attempt to comply with the requirements of Code 70-305, as amended by the act of December, 1953 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov.-Dec. Sess., pp. 440-446 (b)); and this court will, therefore, not pass upon any assignment of error in the determination of which reference must be had to the purported brief of evidence. Robinson v. State, 209 Ga. 650 (1) (75 S. E. 2d 9); Heard v. Helms, 210 Ga. 669 (82 S. E. 2d 129); Williamson v. Yakupian, 211 Ga. 61 (84 S. E. 2d 15); Brown v. Clarke, 211 Ga. 61 (84 S. E. 2d 14); Hester Bennett Lumber Co. v. Alexander, 211 Ga. 402.
2. Since the general grounds of the motion for new trial and each of the two special grounds require reference to the brief of evidence, no question is presented for determination by this court.
C. Lester McDonald filed in Coffee Superior Court, against Henry Fletcher, a petition which alleged substantially the following: The petitioner and the defendant are coterminous landowners, and for more than 20 years an old fence has marked their boundary line. The prayers, besides for process and a rule nisi, were: that title to a 6-foot strip of land, situated between land admittedly owned by the petitioner on the south and by the defendant on the north, be decreed to be in the petitioner; that the defendant be enjoined from trespassing thereon; and that the petitioner be granted general equitable relief. The defendant filed an answer, in which he denied material allegations of the petition.
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant. The petitioner's motion for new trial, which was amended by adding two special grounds complaining of the court's charge, was denied and the exception is to that judgment.
Gibson & Maddox, for plaintiff in error.
SUBMITTED JANUARY 10, 1955 -- DECIDED FEBRUARY 17, 1955.
Saturday May 23 03:06 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com