Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. Brock
82 S.E. 225, 141 Ga. 840, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 170
Opinion
1. While the extracts from the charge of the court, complained of in the motion for á new trial, were not entirely free from verbal inaccuracies, they did not contain such material error as to afford ground for a new trial.
2. While the evidence supporting a verdict in plaintiff’s favor was slight, it can not be held that the verdict was without evidence to support it.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. Brock, 82 S.E. 225, 141 Ga. 840, 1914 Ga. LEXIS 170 (Ga. 1914).
82 S.E. 225 (Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. Brock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hutchinson v. Tillman
211 S.E.2d 912 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Womack v. St. Joseph's Hospital, Inc.
205 S.E.2d 72 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
White v. Hammond
199 S.E.2d 809 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Price v. Whitley Construction Co.
91 Ga. App. 257 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Young v. Kendrick
80 S.E.2d 201 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Smith v. Merck
57 S.E.2d 326 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
Smith v. State
167 S.E. 714 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Barlow v. Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad
152 S.E. 902 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1930)
Yonce v. State
114 S.E. 584 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1922)
Yonce v. State
114 S.E. 325 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1922)