Court Opinion

ID: 5591425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-11 02:11:02.509423+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:36:27.684296
License: Public Domain

Bell, Justice.
The bill of exceptions as brought by the defendant assigns error only upon a judgment sustaining demurrers to the answer and cross-bill of the defendant and dismissing the same. Held:
1. The judgment complained of is not such a final judgment as may bo reviewed by direct bill of exceptions. Accordingly, the motion to dismiss the writ of error must be sustained. Bellinger v. Eblin, 158 Ga. 657 (124 S. E. 137); White v. Chisolm, 160 Ga. 177 (127 S. E. 140); Daniel v. Chastaine, 177 Ga. 730 (2) (171 S. E. 373); Gilbert v. Tippens, 183 Ga. 497 (188 S. E. 699).
2. The request for leave, to treat the official copy of the bill of exceptions of file in the court below as exceptions pendente lite is denied. United Glass Co. v. McConnell, 110 Ga. 616 (2) (36 S. E. 58); Harvey v. Bowles, 112 Ga. 421 (2) (37 S. E. 364); Berryman v. Haden, 112 Ga. 752 (4) (38 S. E. 53); Drake v. Drake, 181 Ga. 844 (184 S. E. 699); *461Thomasville Iron Works v. Clark, 16 Ga. App. 537 (2) (85 S. E. 674); Hines v. Jolly, 24 Ga. App. 201 (100 S. E. 638).
No. 11845.
June 16, 1937.
B. B. Garland, for plaintiff in error.
D. T. Pye and A. E. Wilson, contra.

Writ of error dismissed.

All the Justices concur.