Case ID: ga_89/html/0371-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bell v. Herndon.
    This case being one which was pending in the superior, court when the act of November 12th, 1889, (pamphlet p. 83) was passed, the limitation of thirty days from the trial prescribed by that act for making motions for new trials and filing briefs Of evidence, does not apply to the same. Such was the ruling of a majority of the court in Smith v. Daws, 85 Oa. 625, which is now affirmed by a full bench.
    May 27, 1892.
    New trial. Practice. Before Judge McWhorter. Elbert superior court. September term, 1891.
    The motion for a new trial was dismissed on the ground that it was not made or filed within thirty days from the date of the trial, and upon this ruling error is assigned. The suit was commenced on February 22, 1887 ; the case was tried at the September term, 1891, on September 14; on September 19 the court, by proper order, took a recess until the second Monday in December; the motion for a new trial was presented, served and filed on December 17, during the term of the court.
   Judgment reversed.

McCurry & Proeeitt, for plaintiff.

J. N. Worley, for defendant.