Adams v. Glatt

116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 53, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 247
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMarch 7, 1923
Docket14113
StatusPublished

This text of 116 S.E. 555 (Adams v. Glatt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Adams v. Glatt, 116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 53, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 247 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

A motion to set aside a verdict and judgment, based on matters not appearing on the face of the record, is in effect a motion for a new trial, and is subject to all the rules of law governing such motions, so as to require a brief of the evidence (James v. Douglasville Banking Co., 26 Ca. App. 509 (106 S. E. 595); Ca. Ry. & El. Co. v. Hamer, 1 Ga. App. 673 (58 S. E. 54); Adams v. Overland-Madison Co., 27 Ga. App. 531, 533 (3) (109 S. E. 413) ); and where, as in the instant case, the order of the trial judge overruling and denying the [54]*54motion to set aside the verdict and judgment previously entered in the case shows affirmatively that no brief of the evidence was filed, and that the court did not pass upon the merits of the motion, the judgment denying the motion cannot be reversed.

Decided March 7, 1923. Motion to set aside judgment; from Fulton superior court — Judge Ellis. September 23, 1922. J. W. LeOraw, for plaintiff in error. Branch & Howard, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworih, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. Hamer
58 S.E. 54 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
James v. Douglasville Banking Co.
106 S.E. 595 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)
Adams v. Overland-Madison Co.
109 S.E. 413 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 S.E. 555, 30 Ga. App. 53, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 247, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-glatt-gactapp-1923.