TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kennedy v. Rogers

Kennedy v. Rogers, sheriff

Kennedy v. Rogers, 88 S.E. 974 (Ga. 1916)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Georgia · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 18, 1916
Judges
Lumpkin
Citations
88 S.E. 974145 Ga. 2921916 Ga. LEXIS 280
Summary
Petition for injunction. Before Judge Sheppard. Evans superior court. June 23, 1915.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Lumpkin

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Lumpkin, J.

1. Where exception is taken to the refusal to grant an interlocutory injunction, evidence used on the hearing of the application must be brought up in the bill of exceptions, or be attached as an exhibit or exhibits thereto and duly identified by the presiding judge, or be included in a brief of evidence approved and made a part of the record, and thus brought to this court.

2. Where no evidence was brought up in the bill of exceptions, or as an exhibit thereto duly identified, and no brief of the evidence was approved and filed in the trial court, a specification in the bill of exceptions of certain affidavits and other evidence to be sent up by the clerk of the superior court to this court, and the inclusion in the record of such affidavits and other evidence, without more, will not authorize this court to consider such evidence.

*293 May 18, 1916. Petition for injunction. Before Judge Sheppard. Evans superior court. June 23, 1915. Anderson & Jones and Daniel & Daniel, for plaintiffs. Hitch & Denmarlc and H. H. Elders, for defendants.

3. A consideration of the evidence being necessary for a determination of the only assignment of error made in the bill of exceptions, and the evidence introduced on the hearing in the trial court not having been brought to this court in such manner that it can be considered, a judgment of affirmance will result. Roberts v. City of Cairo, 133 Ga. 642, 648 ( 66 S. E. 938 ), and citations; Silvey v. Brown, 137 Ga. 104 ( 72 S. E. 907 ); Barrow v. Barrow, 139 Ga. 806 ( 78 S. E. 123 ).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1923: 11925: 11927: 11934: 11942: 11949: 11951: 119232026peak 1923 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Pope v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.20 S.E.2d 13 (Ga. 1942)
  2. Caldwell v. Sturdivant118 S.E. 39 (Ga. 1923)
  3. Town of Fairburn v. Edmondson129 S.E. 108 (Ga. 1925)
  4. Woodall v. McCurry177 S.E. 919 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934)
  5. Flowers v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.67 S.E.2d 159 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951)
  6. Jackson v. Muse140 S.E. 364 (Ga. 1927)

Most recent

  1. Flowers v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.67 S.E.2d 159 (Ga. Ct. App. 1951)
  2. Odom v. Odom55 S.E.2d 148 (Ga. 1949)
  3. Pope v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.20 S.E.2d 13 (Ga. 1942)
  4. Woodall v. McCurry177 S.E. 919 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934)
  5. Jackson v. Muse140 S.E. 364 (Ga. 1927)
  6. Town of Fairburn v. Edmondson129 S.E. 108 (Ga. 1925)

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.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
Roberts v. City of Cairo, 66 S.E. 938 (Ga. 1909) 33
Silvey & Co. v. Brown, 72 S.E. 907 (Ga. 1911) 18
Barrow v. Barrow, 78 S.E. 123 (Ga. 1913) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list