Atlanta Consolidated Street Railway Co. v. Bigham

30 S.E. 934, 105 Ga. 498, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 619
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 8, 1898·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Cobb, J.

1. Objections to evidence can not be considered by this court,, unless the record shows that objection to the same was made at the-trial, and what that objection was.

2. The general rule as to the probative value of positive and negative testimony is subject to the qualification that other things are equal and the Witnesses are of equal credibility. It follows that a request to charge which did not embody this qualification was properly re- ■ fused. See Humphries v. State, 100 Ga. 260.

3. The evidence warranted the verdict. Other requests to charge than the one dealt with above were covered by the general charge; and there was no error in denying a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Atlanta Consolidated Street Railway Co. v. Bigham, 30 S.E. 934, 105 Ga. 498, 1898 Ga. LEXIS 619 (Ga. 1898).

30 S.E. 934 (Atlanta Consolidated Street Railway Co. v. Bigham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rider v. State
27 S.E.2d 667 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
Estill v. Estill
100 S.E. 365 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)
Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Chapman
78 S.E. 631 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1913)
Peak v. State
62 S.E. 665 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Cowart v. State
48 S.E. 198 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Southern Railway Co. v. O'Bryan
42 S.E. 42 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1902)