It has long been recognized that a large percentage of the cases decided by the appellate courts of Georgia are decided in whole or in part upon procedural points. Because of this fact, any attempt to survey the matters decided on such points during any twelve-month period must include reference to many cases, however brief the treatment. In making such a survey, one frequently faces the problem of deciding whether a holding is based primarily upon procedure or whether the case should be considered substantive in nature. Of course, some procedure is involved in the hearing, trial or appeal of every case that reaches our reports, but in many instances the mechanics of obtaining an adjudication are purely incidental, and the case is decided upon its merits. Such cases have generally been omitted from the present treatment. Other cases, just as obviously, turn purely upon points of procedure, and these cases the writer has attempted to include with such comment as space will allow. Some reference has also been made to what may be termed "borderline" cases, that is to say, cases which turn upon substantive points but which set out enough of the procedure to furnish interesting examples or suggestions for the practitioner with a similar case. Certain of these cases might prove valuable, even though no specific ruling has been envoked upon points of procedure
Davis, Wiley H.
"Practice and Procedure,"
Mercer Law Review: Vol. 2:
1, Article 16.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.mercer.edu/jour_mlr/vol2/iss1/16