Andrews v. McLendon

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Andrews v. McLendon

94 S.E. 815, 21 Ga. App. 649, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 451

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 22, 1918

Docket9160

StatusPublished

This text of 94 S.E. 815 (Andrews v. McLendon) 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

Andrews v. McLendon, 94 S.E. 815, 21 Ga. App. 649, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 451 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, P. J.

1. The court did not err in failing to give the requested instructions to the jury, as. complained of in the first ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial, as such instructions were not authorized by evidence.

2. The remaining ground of the amendment .to the motion for a new trial is based upon alleged newly discovered evidence. That evidence ap[650]*650pears to be cumulative and impeaching in its nature, and, moreover, was met by a counter-showing. It does not appear that the trial judge abused his discretion in overruling this ground of the motion.

Decided January 22, 1918.

Action for money had and received; from Calhoun superior court — Judge Harrell. July 21, 1917.

Smith & Miller, for plaintiff in error. B. W. Fortson, contra.

3. The verdict was strongly supported by evidence, and the court did not err in refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Bloodworih and' Harwell, JJ., concur.

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