Johnson v. James
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.
Luke, J.
1. The making of an oral motion for a new trial in the municipal court of Atlanta, as provided for by act of 1913 (Ga. Laws, 1913, p. 145 (a-b)), is a cumulative remedy and does not defeat the right of certiorari.
2. Upon the petition for certiorari and the answer of the judge of the municipal court, the order sustaining the certiorari was demanded.
Judgment affirmed.
Wade, O. J., and George, J., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 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.