
    EVAN WELLS, plaintiff in error, v. A. B. FLOWERS, defendant in error.
    (Atlanta,
    June Term, 1870.)
    CERTIORARI—MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE AS ANSWER—NO GROUND FOR DISMISSAL—SUFFICIENT ANSWER SHOULD BE REQUIRED.—Where a Justice of the Peace obtained a memorandum of the evidence on the trial in his Court, taken down by plaintiff’s counsel, and annexed it to the papers as his answer to the certiorari, and the answer was excepted to by the defendant in certiorari, on that ground:
    
      Held, that it was error in the Judge to dismiss the certiorari. He should have ordered the Justice 'to make such answer as the law required.
    Certiorari. Before Judge Schley. Liberty Superior Court. April Term, 1870.
    ^Flowers sued out a possessory-warrant against Wells. On the trial, the Justice requested Well’s attorney to take down the testimony in the trial, which he did in pencil, under the supervision of the Justice. The cause was decided against Wells and he sued out a certiorari. When it was called, Flower’s attorney moved to dismiss it, because the Justice’s return was in the hand-writing of Well’s attorney. Well’s attorney stated that the Justice called on him for said evidence, so taking down, and he handed it to him only to aid him in making his return, but that the Justice had adopted it as the return, adding his certificate thereto, of which Well’s attorney was ignorant till then, because he had been sick, and the papers had been in possession of Flower’s attorney ever since the Justice made the return. And upon this, Well’s attorney moved that the Justice be required to answer according to law.- The Court overruled this motion and dismissed the certiorari, that is assigned as error.
    Wm. B. Gaulden, for plaintiff in error.
    J. Beaseley, for defendant.
   By the Court—

BROWN, C. J.,

delivering the opinion.

It is quite evident that the answer to the certiorari, made by the Justice of the Peace, was not in compliance with the statute. He annexed the memorandum of the evidence, taken down on the trial. by plaintiff’s counsel, under his supervision, to the papers as his answer. This was illegal and improper, and was a good ground of exception to the answer. But we do not think, under the facts in this case, that it authorized the Judge to dismiss the certiorari. He should have granted the order moved for by the plaintiff’s counsel, and have directed the Justice of the Peace to file his answer in conformity to law...

Judgment reversed.  