Allen v. Kessler
This text of 47 S.E. 900 (Allen v. Kessler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The general rule is, that in order for the exclusion of oral evidence to he considered as a ground for a new trial, it must appear that a pertinent question was asked, that the court refused to allow the answer, and that a statement was made to the court at the time, showing what the answer would be ; and that such testimony was material and would have benefited the complaining party. Griffin v. Henderson, 117 Ga. 382, and' cit. In view of this rule, neither of the grounds of the amended motion for a new trial properly presents any question for determination.
2. The verdict was warranted by the evidence.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
47 S.E. 900, 120 Ga. 319, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allen-v-kessler-ga-1904.