History
  • No items yet
midpage
Jones v. Hubbell
152 Ga. 496
Ga.
1922
Check Treatment
Gilbert, J.

“1. The Supreme Court will not review the evidence in a case when it is apparent that there has been no bona ffde effort to brief the evidence as required- by law, and when the document purporting to be a brief of the evidence is extensively interspersed with objections to testimony, statements, motions, and arguments of counsel, rulings of the court, evidence to which. objections were sustained, and also with colloquies between counsel and court; none of which could properly have been placed in a brief of evidence. Equitable Mortgage Co. v. Bell, 115 Ga. 651; Graham v. Baxley, 117 Ga. 42; Wall v. Mercer, 119 Ga. 346.

“2. Where in such a case no question is presented for decision which can be determined without reference to the evidence, the judgment of the court below must be affirmed.” McComb v. Hines, 123 Ga. 246 (51 S. E. 300); Roberts v. Rowell, 152 Ga. 97 (108 S. E. 466).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Jones v. Hubbell
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: Jan 11, 1922
Citation: 152 Ga. 496
Docket Number: No. 2683
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.