History
  • No items yet
midpage
Paschal v. Morgan
19 Ga. App. 245
Ga. Ct. App.
1917
Check Treatment
Luke, J.

An agreement Between counsel that two eases be submitted at the same time to one jury did not amount to a consolidation of the eases, and did not authorize the losing party, who was a party to both cases, to file one bill of exceptions, attempting to bring both of the eases to this court for decision here, there being a separate judgment in each case. This court has no jurisdiction to entertain such a bill of exceptions, and therefore the writ of error must be dismissed. This court being without jurisdiction, the bill of exceptions can not be amended by striking one of the cases. Dickey v. State, 101 Ga. 572 (28 S. E. 980); Erwin v. Ennis, 104 Ga. 861 (31 S. E. 444) ; Hicks v. Walker, 105 Ga. 480 (30 S. E. 383); Walker v. Conn, 112 Ga. 314 (37 S. E. 403) ; Wells v. Coker Banking Co., 113 Ga. 857 (39 S. E. 298) ; Purvis v. Ferst, 114 Ga. 689 (40 S. E. 723) ; Brown v. L. & N. R. Co., 117 Ga. 222 (43 S. E. 498) ; Center v. Fickett Paper Co., 117 Ga. 222 (43 S. E. 498) ; Harris v. Gano, 117 Ga. 950 (44 S. E. 8) ; Cole v. Stanley, 118 Ga. 259 (45 S. E. 282); Valdosta Guano Co. v. Hart, 119 Ga. 909 (47 S. E. 212).

Writ of error dismissed.

Wade, C. J., and George, J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Paschal v. Morgan
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Feb 1, 1917
Citation: 19 Ga. App. 245
Docket Number: 8152
Court Abbreviation: Ga. Ct. App.
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.