INSOLVENCY. See Wills. INTERROGATORIES. Answer full enough, in suit for royalty on "axle grease," though Answer to cross, not sufficiently full here. Roberts vs. Crowley, 429(2). Mental competency of witness examined by, presumed. Mayor vs. Same: If disputed by other evidence, question properly Presumption is, commissioners examined a witness mentally com- INTEREST AND USURY. See Trover. Bill of sale to mules; defendant may attack, in trover suit, by show- Same: And this without filing a plea to that effect. Ibid. est. Same: Only special damages computable on evidence of Deposits general, bank not liable for interest on; and bank pay- Homicide of husband; widow may recover interest added to dam. Mortgage infected with, not void. Hodge vs. Brown, 276. Same: Legislation suggested putting mortgages on same Remaindermen, interest not run in favor of, until death of life Surety discharged where creditor was to take mortgage with waiver Verdict for so much and interest, the interest is to be computed JUDGE. Disqualified by reason of having once been counsel, cannot confirm sale of trust estate so as to bind minors. East Rome Co. vs. Cothran, 360(4). Disqualification, that it was partner who acted in former part of litigation, and firm took no fee, not remove. Ibid. 367. JUDGMENTS. See Justice Courts. Conclusiveness and binding force of, discussed. Mayer vs. Hover, 314(2). Conclusive, though erroneous, until set aside, and not subject to collateral attack. Deyton vs. Bell, 370,1a). Dies non juridicus, fourth of July is not. Hamer vs. Sears, 288. Dormant, ca. sa., issuing of, sufficient to prevent judgment from becoming. Gholston vs. O'Kelley, 21. Dormant ; entry of officer dated back so as to revive, open to question by parol. Sprinz vs Frank, 162(2). Same: If entry of nulla bona antedated by design, not only void but villainous. Ibid. 162(4). Dormant, is not, when execution was not barred at the time it came into court to claim fund. Gholston vs. O'Kelley, 21. Dormant, judgment becoming, pending homestead, is so at expiration of. Anderson vs. Kilgo, 699. Same: Hart vs. Evans, 80 Ga. 330, distinguished. Ibid. Dormant, receipt of plaintiff's attorney, where court ordered payment, sufficient to prevent judgment from becoming. Gholston vs. O'Kelley, 21. Dormant; though judgment subjecting land held under voluntary deed became so, and was revived, debt still existed and land was still subject. Seals vs. Benson, 44. Dormancy, order for fi. fa. to proceed after contest between parties and levy within a year after, will prevent. Gholston vs. O' Kelley, 22. Dormancy, petition by plaintiff for alias fi. fa. and proceedings thereon, will prevent. Ibid. Dormancy, proceedings by plaintiff, of any sort, showing purpose to keep alive, will prevent. Ibid. Dormancy, receipt by sheriff for costs entered thereon, will prevent. Ibid. 21. Dormancy, ruling sheriff to compel collection before bar attaches, will prevent. Ibid. 23. Dormancy; 22914 has always received an equitable construction. Same: Putting fi. fa. in sheriff's hands to claim fund, and Fourth of July, rendered on, valid. Hamer vs. Sears, 288. Harvey, 711. West vs. Motion to set aside, agreement to continue case and to arbitrate it, Perjury of witness, not set aside for, where no conviction of witness. Reservation of title, property held by defendant under purchase Unconditional contract in writing, court should render judgment Same: Writing was an acknowledgment of a debt for pro- JUDICIAL COGNIZANCE. See Laws. Alcohol is spirituous and intoxicating, noticed judicially. Snider vs. Facts known to every man of common understanding noticed judi- JURISDICTION. See Justice Courts. Superior court has none of bill of exceptions from city court (Car- JURY AND JURORS. City courts, no general law prescribing number to be drawn in. Same: Special act (Bartow) providing eighteen to strike Grand, action of, the proper if not only evidence of, is an entry duly Grand; lists, irregularities in certifying, no ground for quashing Law as laid down by presiding judge, jury must take, in criminal cases. Hunt vs. State, 140(1). Poll, juror, on, agrees to verdict "reluctantly," no ground for new trial. Parker vs. State, 332(5). Sending out, in civil or criminal case, pending hearing of preliminary testimony, is in discretion of court. Woolfolk vs. State, 553(7), 564. Shaping questions for. See Charge of court.. Strikes, number of, no restriction on power of legislature to limit, in city courts, if twelve left. Conyers vs. Graham, 615(4). Trial "inviolate" under constitution, 25174, if by twelve in city court, though only eighteen to strike from. Ibid. Verdict, agreeing to reluctantly, no ground for new trial. Parker vs. State, 332(5). JUSTICE COURTS. Judgment, should render and write out at court-ground, before he adjourns his court. Bowden vs. Taylor, 199(6). Jurisdiction: conversion of personal property, have jurisdiction of. White Company vs. County, 48. Jurisdiction: damages for detaining steamer by river bridge, have none. Ibid. 47(1). Same: James vs. Smith, 62 Ga. 345, distinguished. Ibid. Jurisdiction: forthcoming bond to illegality for $300; suit for less than $100, maintainable. Bowden vs. Taylor, 199(1). JUSTIFICATION. See Libel. Burden of proof is on defendant when plea of filed, and plaintiff need introduce no proof. Rigden vs. Jordan, 668(2a). Same: Defendant has right to open and conclude. Ibid. 668(2b). Damages how assessed when plea of, filed and not sustained. Ibid. 674. General issue is abandoned by filing plea of. Ibid. 668(2a). Open and conclude argument, defendant has right to, when plea filed (libel). Johnson vs. Bradstreet Co. 425. Same: And this, though general issue also filed. Ibid. Plea admitting arrest of plaintiff for cheating and swindling, and setting out facts as amounting to probable cause; when sufficient. Rigden vs. Jordan, 668(1). Plea of, may come in at any stage of case. Johnson vs. Bradstreet Co. JUSTICE OF THE PEACE. Dormancy, receipt for his costs entered by magistrate on fi. fa. will prevent. Gholston vs. O'Kelly, 19(2). LACHES. See Banks. Acquiescence fourteen years in division in kind of lands under will, binding, though unequal by mistake of appraisers. Leverett vs. Stevenson, 701. Minority stockholders complaining of ultra vires, must act promptly. LANDLORD AND TENANT. See Rent. action of majority as being Alexander vs. Searcy, 536(1). Cropper, removing and selling crop, not indictable under 24440, though title reserved in landlord. Padgett vs. State, 466. Lien, landlord's special, superior to all other liens, except for taxes. Stokes vs. Gillis, 191. Purchaser of cotton on which landlord has lien for rent, liable for value of rent. Ibid. Rent claim prevails over rights of vendor selling with reservation of title, if not executed and recorded properly. Gartrell vs. Clay, 327. Rent; note here was for rent only, though as printed, adapted to advances also. Andrew vs. Stewart, 53(4). Surety on note who was also landlord of maker, not relieved by payee making further advances, and taking mortgage on crop. Stokes vs. Gillis, 187. Same: Nor by payee taking cotton on which surety had a lien for rent. Ibid. Same: Surety could recover of payee value of the rent, or amount of his damage. Ibid. Transferee of rent note, (under act 1882-3, p. 109,) rights of, discussed. Andrew vs. Stewart, 53. Same: Though transferred as collateral security, and before crop planted, not alter case, unless. Ibid. Trespass, landlord liable in damages for breaking house to seize effects sold him by tenant, without first demanding surrender. Shores vs. Brooks, 469(2). Same: Punitive damages may be awarded. Trespass, landlord liable in, for entering, breaking house, and seizing tenant's cotton. Ibid. 468(1).. Same: Punitive damages recoverable, though proceeds fairly applied to lien debt. Ibid. |