Cain v. Ligon 76 Ga. 102

Cain et al. vs. Ligon, administrator.

1. The bill of exceptions was signed by the judge on February 10. Entered upon it is the following statement: “Served B. F. Harrell, attorney for T. T. Ligón, administrator (defendant in error), this day personally with copy of the above and foregoing bill of exceptions,” datedFebruary 20, and signed by one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs in error. On February 23, the same attorney indorsed upon the bill of exceptions an affidavit that he served a copy of the bill of exceptions on the attorney for the defendant in error on February 20. The bill of exceptions was filed February 24:

Held, that this was a substantial compliance with the law, and although the affidavit was made after the expiration of ten days from the signing by the judge, yet, having been made before the filing, and showing that the service was, in fact, made within the time allowed by law, the writ of error will not be dismissed.

2. Exceptions to the admission of evidence which do not show that objection thereto was made, or do not state upon what ground it was made, cannot be considered.

8 The verdict and decree áre warranted by the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

November 3, 1885.