Shaine & Son v. Block

Mar 7, 1922
13100
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Broyles
Broyles, 0. J.

1. Where no proper brief of evidence is sent up, this court cannot decide any question which is dependent ‍​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​​​​​‌​‌‍upon a consideration of the evidence. “ If all the assignments of error are of that class, a judgment of affirmance will result. If there are assignments of error, such as rulings on demurrers, or the like, which do not ‍​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​​​​​‌​‌‍involve a consideration of the evidence, they may be passed on.” Crumbley v. Brook, 135 Ga. 723 (70 S. E. 655).

2. What purports to be a brief of the evidence in the instant case is evidently a copy of the stenographic report of the proceedings therein, and ‍​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​​​​​‌​‌‍contains all the questions propounded by counsel on both sides to the • witnesses, the answers thereto, the objections of counsel to the admission of evidence, and the rulings of the court thereon. Such a paper is not a substantial ‍​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​​​​​‌​‌‍compliance with the law as to the bringing of a brief of evidence to this court; and as all the grounds of error involve a consideration of the evidence, an affirmance must result.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Complaint; from city ‍​​‌‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌​‌​​​​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​​​​​​​​‌​‌‍court of Greensboro — W. H. Fisher, judge pro hae vice. October 20, 1921. J. A. Mitchell, for plaintiff in error. J. G. Faust, contra.