Ross v. Harvey & Scott
Ross v. Harvey & Scott
Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
delivering the opinion.
The only question in this case is, is the plaintiff a nonresident? If so, the Acts of 1812 and 1839 make the attorneys liable for costs. It is admitted that the plaintiff’s principal office for doing business is in Dalton, Whitfield county. Their road has been located in Floyd. Lands have been ceded for that purpose. A number of the stockholders, together with one director, reside in Floyd, and moreover, the Dalton and Gadsden roads have, since the institution of the suit, been united with the Georgia and Alabama Road, whose place of doing business is Rome, Floyd county. This last fact comes too late to affect the question, and while it may be true that the location of the road through Floyd will confer jurisdiction for certain purposes, under the special Legislature of 1854 and 1856, yet this case does not fall within them. This is an action by the Dalton and Gadsden Road, against certain stockholders, to collect the assessments
Let the judgment be reversed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- A. B. Ross, in error v. Harvey & Scott, in error
- Status
- Published