From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lake v. Hicks

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 12, 1978
248 S.E.2d 236 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)

Opinion

55839.

SUBMITTED MAY 15, 1978.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 12, 1978.

Breach of contract. Fulton Superior Court. Before Judge McKenzie.

Michael J. Cohen, for appellant.

E. Graydon Shuford, for appellee.


Appellant Lake appeals an adverse judgment in the amount of $11,500 entered on a jury verdict in a breach of contract action. We affirm.

1. This trial was not reported and the trial judge refused to approve a proposed summary of evidence submitted by appellant. "There being no transcript or summary of evidence before this court, the enumerations of error requiring a consideration of the evidence are without merit." Nixdorf Enterprises, Inc. v. Bell, 127 Ga. App. 617 (1) ( 194 S.E.2d 486).

2. The brief contains references to defendant's exhibits (canceled checks and contracts) which were never submitted to the trial court and which do not appear in the record on appeal. Accordingly, counsel's argument cannot be considered. Harper v. Ga. S. F. R. Co., 140 Ga. App. 802 (2) ( 232 S.E.2d 118).

3. Appellant argues that the judgment cannot stand because he never contracted with appellee individually. It is asserted that transactions between the litigants were made as corporations. These arguments must be rejected as unsupported. Airport Assoc. v. Audioptic Instructional Devices, Inc., 125 Ga. App. 325 (2) ( 187 S.E.2d 507).

4. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to certify his proposed statement of facts and conclusions of law. Appellee did not consent to appellant's summary of the evidence and law.

"Since the case was tried before a jury, findings of fact and conclusions of law ... were not required. [Cit.]" Moore v. First Nat. Bank of Atlanta, 141 Ga. App. 164 (2) ( 233 S.E.2d 26). Cf. Chapman v. Conner, 138 Ga. App. 518 (2) ( 226 S.E.2d 625).

Appellant's failure to comply with any of the methods provided by Code Ann. § 6-805 removes any possible error on the grounds asserted. See Herring v. Herring, 228 Ga. 492 ( 186 S.E.2d 538). Cf. Buffington v. Ray-O-Lite Southeast, Inc., 119 Ga. App. 799 ( 168 S.E.2d 662).

Judgment affirmed. Bell, C. J., and Birdsong, J., concur.

SUBMITTED MAY 15, 1978 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 12, 1978.


Summaries of

Lake v. Hicks

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 12, 1978
248 S.E.2d 236 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
Case details for

Lake v. Hicks

Case Details

Full title:LAKE v. HICKS

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 12, 1978

Citations

248 S.E.2d 236 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978)
248 S.E.2d 236

Citing Cases

Bussel v. Freedman

In the absence thereof, we may not consider the issue presented. See Lake v. Hicks, 147 Ga. App. 175 ( 248…

Bentley-Kessinger, Inc. v. Jones

In order to contest the trial court's interpretation of the lease agreement, appellant was required to make a…