American Mills Co. v. Pruitt-Barrett Hardware Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

American Mills Co. v. Pruitt-Barrett Hardware Co.

117 S.E. 110, 30 Ga. App. 161, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 328

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 11, 1923·No. 14182·Published

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

The court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant. “The mere fact that there are conflicts in the testimony does not render the direction of a verdict in favor of a party erroneous,' when it appears that the conflicts are immaterial, and that, giving to the opposite party the benefit of the most favorable view of the evidence as a whole and of all legitimate inferences therefrom, the verdict against him is demanded.” Dorris v. Farmers & Merchants Bank, 22 Ga. App. 514 (5), 518 (5) (96 S. E. 450), and citations.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J-., conour. • J. 0. Adams, B. P. Gaillard Jr., for plaintiff. O. N. Davie, for defendant.

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

Bloodworth, J.

The court did not err in directing a verdict for the defendant. “The mere fact that there are conflicts in the testimony does not render the direction of a verdict in favor of a party erroneous,' when it appears that the conflicts are immaterial, and that, giving to the opposite party the benefit of the most favorable view of the evidence as a whole and of all legitimate inferences therefrom, the verdict against him is demanded.” Dorris v. Farmers & Merchants Bank, 22 Ga. App. 514 (5), 518 (5) (96 S. E. 450), and citations.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J-., conour. • J. 0. Adams, B. P. Gaillard Jr., for plaintiff. O. N. Davie, for defendant.

American Mills Co. v. Pruitt-Barrett Hardware Co., 117 S.E. 110, 30 Ga. App. 161, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 328 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

117 S.E. 110 (American Mills Co. v. Pruitt-Barrett Hardware Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related