
Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448If counsel on either side, before argument begins, applies to the court for extension of the time prescribed for argument and states in his place or on oath, in the discretion of the court, that he or they cannot do the case justice within the time prescribed and that it will require for that purpose additional time, stating how much additional time will be necessary, the court shall grant such extension of time as may seem reasonable and proper.
(Ga. L. 1924, p. 75, § 4; Code 1933, § 81-1008.)
- In a personal injury case, the trial court erred in denying, under Ga. Unif. Super. Ct. R. 13.2, the injured party's request for an extension of time for closing argument because the request was timely and was authorized by O.C.G.A. § 9-10-181, which took precedence over the rule. Rouse v. Polott, 274 Ga. App. 226, 617 S.E.2d 185 (2005).
Cited in Lovett v. Sandersville R.R., 199 Ga. 238, 33 S.E.2d 905 (1945); Lovett v. Sandersville R.R., 72 Ga. App. 692, 34 S.E.2d 664 (1945).
- 75A Am. Jur. 2d, Trial, §§ 543, 547 et seq.
- 88 C.J.S., Trial, § 292.
- Prejudicial effect of trial court's denial, or equivalent, of counsel's right to argue case, 38 A.L.R.2d 1396.
Database error: SQLSTATE[HY000]: General error: 8 attempt to write a readonly database
This Georgia Code resource is curated by Graham Syfert, a personal injury and workers' compensation attorney admitted in Georgia (State Bar of Georgia No. 881027, since 2006) and Florida. Attorney Syfert regularly works with Title 9 in the context of Georgia civil practice and statute of limitations and represents clients throughout Northeast Florida and South Georgia. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.