Case Name: West v. Smith et al., executors
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1892-08-27
Citations: 90 Ga. 284
Docket Number: 
Parties: West v. Smith et al., executors.
Judges: 
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 90
Pages: 284–285

Head Matter:
West v. Smith et al., executors.
Where, during the term at which a case was tried, a motion for new trial was made but no brief of evidence was filed, and by an order passed at that term the motion was set for a hearing in vacation, and thereafter hy various orders in vacation was continued from time to time, hut in none of said o'rders was any time beyond the trial term allowed for filing a brief of evidence, it was too late at the final hearing of the motion, months after the trial term had expired, to tender such brief, and the same when so tendered was properly rejected and the motion for new trial dismissed.
August 27, 1892.
New trial. Brief of evidence. Practice. Before Judge Fish. Dooly superior court. September term, 1891.
This was a suit on a foreign judgment. On the trial a verdict for the plaintiff was rendered under direction of the court. This was on September 19, 1891, during the September term of Dooly superior court. The defendant moved for a new trial on various grounds, and took an order for the plaintiffs to show cause on October the 19th why the motion should not be granted, “ and that movants have until the hearing to perfect motion and make such amendments as may be desired.” On. October 19th the hearing of the motion was reset for November 14th, counsel for the movants having been unable to appear. On November 14th it was ordered that the hearing of the motion for new trial arid the motion to dismiss the same be continued until December 5th. On that day at the hearing the movants tendered and offered to file a brief of all the written and oral evidence that was produced on the trial; but the court refused to allow this to be done, and dismissed the motion for a new trial, to which the movants excepted.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed.
Busbee & Crum, for plaintiff' in error.
E. A. Hawkins, contra.