Edgeman v. Stewart
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Beck, J.
1. This court will not reverse the judgment of the court below overruling the petition for certiorari, there being no sufficiently definite exceptions to the ruling or judgment which the petitioner sought to have corrected by the certiorari proceedings.
2. The petition for certiorari complained of an order requiring an obstruction to be removed from an alleged private way, passed after the introduction of evidence. No ruling on any question of law was set out or assigned as erf or; the only exception to the judgment or assignment was in the following language: “Petitioner avers that said court erred in so finding and in so ordering and in entering up judgment as aforesaid, all of which rulings and findings of said court petitioner assigns as error.” Wheeler v. Worley, 110 Ga. 513 ( 35 S. E. 639 ); Smith *687 v. Marshall, 127 Ga. 374 ( 56 S. E. 416 .); Citizens Banking Co. v. Paris, 119 Ga. 517 ( 46 S. E. 638 ).
May 19, 1914. Certiorari. Before Judge Fite. Catoosa superior court. February 6, 1913. George G. Glenn, for plaintiff in error. Ben E. Neal and Maddox, McCamy & Shumate, contra.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.