Associates Discount Corp. v. Parlier

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Associates Discount Corp. v. Parlier

107 S.E.2d 238, 98 Ga. App. 740, 1958 Ga. App. LEXIS 672

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 16, 1958

Docket37349

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 107 S.E.2d 238 (Associates Discount Corp. v. Parlier) 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

Associates Discount Corp. v. Parlier, 107 S.E.2d 238, 98 Ga. App. 740, 1958 Ga. App. LEXIS 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinions

Gardner, Presiding Judge.

The record in this case is somewhat lengthy. We see no necessity in reciting, the evidence here. As we see the case we see but one question and that is [742]*742whether or not the evidence shows the value of the diamond ring to' be at least as much as $300, which the judge, upon hearing, found to be the value of the ring under the evidence before him. In regard to the evidence as to the value of the ring, it was undisputed that the ring was purchased in 1950 for $300 and that it was worth more than that amount at the time of the trial. The motion n.o.v. is without merit. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict will not lie to a judgment of the trial court in a case where jury trial has been waived.

The judgment of the court for the sum of $448.95 plus costs, is substantiated by the evidence and there is no other issue between the parties except as to the value of the ring which we have discussed hereinabove. The general grounds are without merit.

The court did not err in denying the motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or in denying the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Carlisle, Quillian and Nichols, JJ., concur. Felton, C. J., and Toionsend, J., dissent.

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

Gardner, Presiding Judge.

The record in this case is somewhat lengthy. We see no necessity in reciting, the evidence here. As we see the case we see but one question and that is [742]*742whether or not the evidence shows the value of the diamond ring to' be at least as much as $300, which the judge, upon hearing, found to be the value of the ring under the evidence before him. In regard to the evidence as to the value of the ring, it was undisputed that the ring was purchased in 1950 for $300 and that it was worth more than that amount at the time of the trial. The motion n.o.v. is without merit. A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict will not lie to a judgment of the trial court in a case where jury trial has been waived.

The judgment of the court for the sum of $448.95 plus costs, is substantiated by the evidence and there is no other issue between the parties except as to the value of the ring which we have discussed hereinabove. The general grounds are without merit.

The court did not err in denying the motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or in denying the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Carlisle, Quillian and Nichols, JJ., concur. Felton, C. J., and Toionsend, J., dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 S.E.2d 238, 98 Ga. App. 740, 1958 Ga. App. LEXIS 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/associates-discount-corp-v-parlier-gactapp-1958.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack