Phillips v. Roberts
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Pek Curiam.
1. This ease coming on for decision by an entire bench of six Justices, and they being equally divided upon the questions involving the correctness of the rulings of the Court of Appeals as set out in the first and second headnotes of its opinion in the case of Roberts v. Phillips, 35 Ga. App. 743 ( 134 S. E. 837 ), Eussell, C. J., Beck, P. J., and Gilbert, J., being of the opinion that the rulings of the Court of Appeals in these headnotes are correct, and that its judgment on these questions should be affirmed, and Atkinson, Hill, and Hines, JJ., being of the opinion that the Court of Appeals erred in these rulings, and that its judgment should be reversed on this account, the judgment of *898 the Court of Appeals, so far as these questions are concerned, stands affirmed by operation of law.
No. 5683. September 29, 1928. Foley & Chappell, for plaintiff. McCulchen, Bowden & Gaggslalier, for defendant.
2. The ruling of the Court of Appeals embraced in the third headnote of its decision is affirmed.
Atkinson and Hill, JJ., dissent.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.