Case ID: ga_87/html/0506-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cunningham v. Scott et al.
    
    Practice in Supreme Court. Service.
    1. On a review of the case of Markham v. Huff, 72 Ga. 106, holding that “Where the record and bill of exceptions in an injunction case were not transmitted to the clerk of the Supreme Court by the clerk below within fifteen days from the'service, the case must be dismissed,” the same is affirmed.
    
      2. The service, the date of which is to he counted in estimating the fifteen days for transmission, is the service upon the opposite party in the cause brought up, and not a later voluntary service on a co-party with the plaintiff in error on whom the law requires no service to be made.
    3. In this case, the date of service on the defendant in error being the 4th day of the month, and the date of the clerk’s certificate to the transcript of the record being the 21st of the month, the transmission was too late, and the writ of error is
    July 13, 1891.
    T. W. Latham and T. J. Leetwich, for plaintiff in error.
    J. H. Lumpkin, Will. Haight, Rosser & Carter, N. J. & T. A. Hammond and Ellis & Gray, contra.
    
   Dismissed