Case ID: ga_99/html/0179-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Lumpkin, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

DISMUKES et al. v. BAINBRIDGE STATE BANK.
    June 12, 1896. By two Justices. Argued at the last term.
    Practice in Supreme Court.
    It appears from tbe bill of exceptions, tbat tbe case in tbe superior court was called for trial and defendants were not present; tbat plaintiffs made out tbeir case and obtained a verdict and judgment against defendants; tbat later on tbe same day defendants came into court and moved to reinstate tbe case for trial, which motion was beard and overruled by tbe court; "wherefore tbe defendants in tbe case now tender tbis tbeir bill of exceptions within thirty days from said trial, and pray tbat tbe same may be certified,” etc. Tbe bill of exceptions then designates the declaration, tbe plea, and tibe motion to reinstate, “as necessary record to a clear understanding of tbe errors complained of,” and prays tbat tbe court certify,, and “that tbe errors complained of may be considered and corrected.” It does not assign error upon any ruling or decision of tbe court below.
   Lumpkin, J.

The bill of exceptions containing no assignment of error upon any ruling or decision of the court below, it presents nothing for adjudication by this court, and the writ of error must be dismissed. Writ'of error dismissed.

D. A. Russell, for plaintiffs in error.

Dorvalson & Eaioes, contra.