Court Opinion

ID: 5626183
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 04:53:59.890111+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:37:37.144710
License: Public Domain

MacIntyre, J.
1. The rulings in Woodson v. Paulk, 139 Ga. 783 (78 S. E. 35), and Smith v. Whiddon, 138 Ga. 471 (75 S. E. 635), are controlling on the issues in the present case. See also Roberts v. Eatonton, 50 Ga. App. 592 (179 S. E. 144).
2. “The case of Smith v. Whiddon, supra, after review, is affirmed, and distinguished from the older case of Hartfield v. City of Columbus, 109 Ga. 112 (34 S. E. 288).” Woodson v. Paulk, 139 Ga. 783 (78 S. E. 35).
3. Any ruling in Anglin v. State, 12 Ga. App. 159, 161 (76 S. E. 992), which conflicts with the rulings in Smith v. Whiddon, or Woodson v. Paulk, supra, must yield to them.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Guerry, J., concur.