TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Hall v. Roehr & Co.

Hall v. Roehr & Co., 73 S.E. 550 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Appeals of Georgia · State Appellate Courts
Decided
January 15, 1912
Docket
No. 3590
Judges
Hill
Citations
73 S.E. 55010 Ga. App. 3791912 Ga. App. LEXIS 520
Summary
Trover; from city court of Bainbridge — W. V. Cugter, judge pro hac vice.

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

Opinion of the Court — Hill

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

Hill, C. J.

1. Under the mandatory provisions of the constitution of this State — article 6, section 16 (Civil Code of 1910, § 6543) — the venue of all civil eases is in the county where the defendant resides,'except in certain cases specified in paragraphs 1 to 5 (inclusive) of the said article. A trover suit is a civil ease, and is not among the exceptions to the general rule. Where, therefore, a timely and sufficient plea to the jurisdiction of the court was filed, on the ground that the defendant was not a resident of the county in which the suit was *380 brought, it was error for the trial judge to strike this plea, and the issue therein made should have been submitted to the jury.

Decided January 15, 1912. Trover; from city court of Bainbridge — W. V. Cugter, judge pro hac vice. June 22, 1911. E. 8. Longley, for plaintiff in error. J. G. Hale, W. H. Krause, contra.

2. The giving of a bond for the forthcoming of the property in a trover suit, where bail is required, is in a sense an appearance by the defendant, yet it is not such appearance and pleading to the merits of the case as would constitute a waiver of jurisdiction. To complete such waiver there must not only be a general appearance, but also pleading to the merits. Civil Code (1910), § 5664.

Judgment reversed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1915: 11917: 11925: 11927: 11957: 11962: 11972: 119152026peak 1915 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Morse v. Turner92 S.E. 767 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917)
  2. Flemming v. Drake137 S.E. 268 (Ga. 1927)
  3. Clark Milling Co. v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.127 S.E. 783 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925)
  4. Farmer v. Whitehead98 S.E.2d 145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1957)
  5. Trailmobile, Inc. v. Combs125 S.E.2d 574 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)
  6. Scarborough v. Scarborough189 S.E.2d 864 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)

Most recent

  1. Scarborough v. Scarborough189 S.E.2d 864 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
  2. Trailmobile, Inc. v. Combs125 S.E.2d 574 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)
  3. Farmer v. Whitehead98 S.E.2d 145 (Ga. Ct. App. 1957)
  4. Flemming v. Drake137 S.E. 268 (Ga. 1927)
  5. Clark Milling Co. v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.127 S.E. 783 (Ga. Ct. App. 1925)
  6. Morse v. Turner92 S.E. 767 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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