Pierce v. Haygood , 213 Ga. 459 ( 1957 )

Head, Justice.

1. Where the judge fails to certify that the “bill of exceptions is true,” this court is without jurisdiction to pass upon the merits of the exceptions. Code § 6-806, as amended, Ga. L. 1946, pp. 726, 732; Cady v. Cady, 161 Ga. 556 (131 S. E. 282); Blackley v. Bell, 187 Ga. 702 (1 S. E. 2d 676); Edge v. State, 199 Ga. 431 (34 S. E. 2d 498); Beasley v. Georgia Power Co., 207 Ga. 188 (60 S. E. 2d 363).

2. There can be no; second certificate to a bill of exceptions. Scott v. Central Railroad, 77 Ga. 450; Cordray v. Savannah Union Station Co., 134 Ga. 865 (68 S. E. 697); Langston v. Langston, 141 Ga. 675, 676 (4) (82 S. E. 36); Grant v. Southern Bell Telephone &c. Co., 145 Ga. 298 (89 S. E. 364); Cartledge v. Ashford, 148 Ga. 589 (97 S. E. 521); Kniepkamp v. Richards, 192 Ga. 509, 515 (16 S. E. 2d 24).

Argued July 8, 1957 Decided September 6, 1957. C. 0. Baker, Gardner ■& Gayner, Jay D. Gardner, for plaintiff in error (case No. 19755). Claud B. Caldwell, O. J. Tolnas, P. J. Smith, contra. Claud B. Caldwell, O. J. Tolnas, for plaintiff in error (case No. 19773). P. J. Smith, C. 0. Baker, contra. P. J. Smith, for plaintiff in error (case No. 19776). O. J. Tolnas, C. 0. Baker, contra.

3. Code § 6-810, providing for the certification of material evidence omitted from the transcript of the record, has no application to the facts of the present case, and this court is without jurisdiction to consider the main bill of exceptions. This ruling terminates the case, and the cross-bills of exceptions are therefore dismissed.

Writs of error dismissed.

All the Jtistices concur.