From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fricks v. Cole

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 29, 1965
142 S.E.2d 382 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)

Opinion

41261.

SUBMITTED APRIL 7, 1965.

DECIDED APRIL 29, 1965.

Appellate procedure. Floyd Superior Court. Before Judge Scoggin.

Parker, Clary Kent, Horace T. Clary, for plaintiffs in error.

Wright, Walther Morgan, Clinton J. Morgan, contra.


It is the duty of this court to inquire into its jurisdiction, and where it appears that jurisdiction is lacking, the court should dismiss the writ of error, even though the defendant in error has made no motion to dismiss. Personal Credit Corp. v. Goldwire, 88 Ga. App. 125 ( 76 S.E.2d 129). Service of a copy of the bill of exceptions on the defendant in error or his attorney after it has been certified by the trial court, or due and legal waiver or acknowledgment thereof by the defendant in error or his counsel is essential to give the appellate court jurisdiction to consider the errors assigned. Code Ann. § 6-911; South Side Atlanta Bank v. Anderson, 200 Ga. 322 ( 37 S.E.2d 404). Accordingly, where, as in this case, there is no acknowledgment of service signed by the defendant in error or his attorney attached to the bill of exceptions, nor is there a certificate of service appended thereto, the writ of error must be dismissed. Ray v. Edwards, 106 Ga. App. 270 ( 126 S.E.2d 647); Johnson v. First Nat. Bank of Brunswick, 220 Ga. 340 ( 138 S.E.2d 670); Warnock v. Woodard, 183 Ga. 367 ( 188 S.E. 336); Izlar v. Central of Ga. R. Co., 162 Ga. 558 ( 134 S.E. 315).

Writ of error dismissed. Bell, P. J., and Hall, J., concur.

SUBMITTED APRIL 7, 1965 — DECIDED APRIL 29, 1965.


Summaries of

Fricks v. Cole

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 29, 1965
142 S.E.2d 382 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)
Case details for

Fricks v. Cole

Case Details

Full title:FRICKS et al. v. COLE

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Apr 29, 1965

Citations

142 S.E.2d 382 (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)
142 S.E.2d 382

Citing Cases

Trammel v. Clayton Cty. Bd. of Commrs

This Court has authority to examine its jurisdiction over an appeal on its own motion and to dismiss the…