Anderson v. Kennickell
This text of 87 S.E. 835 (Anderson v. Kennickell) 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.
Opinion
1. The question of damages was one for the jury, there was a conflict in the evidence, and the verdict, having been approved by the trial judge, may not be set aside by this court unless the amount of the verdict justifies the inference of gross mistake or undue bias. It is not for the reviewing court to say that a verdict is entirely inadequate, where nothing appears in the record to indicate that it was induced by prejudice or bias. See Civil Code, § 4399. See also Southern Railway Co. v. Wright, 6 Ga. App. 172 (64 S. E. 703); Pratt Engineering & [575]*575Machine Co. v. Trotti, 142 Ga. 401 (5), 404 (81 S. E. 107); Southern Railway Co. v. Parish, 117 Ga. 893 (45 S. E. 280); Macon & Western R. Co. v. Winn, 26 Ga. 250; Georgia Southern Railroad Co. v. Neel, 68 Ga. 609 (2).
2. There is no such merit in any of the assignments of error in the bill of exceptions as to require the grant of a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 S.E. 835, 17 Ga. App. 574, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 792, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-kennickell-gactapp-1916.