Bales v. Griffin

59 S.E. 316, 3 Ga. App. 97, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 564
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided November 25, 1907·No. 559·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Russell, J.

The finding in favor of the plaintiffs being authorized by the evidence in their behalf, the verdict of the jury will not be disturbed. Crankshaw v. Schweizer Mfg. Co., 1 Ga. App. 363 (58 S. E. 222). The grant of a new trial would not be authorized for an immaterial variance between the allegations and the proof. Folsom v. Lewis, 85 Ga. 146 (11 S. E. 606). Judgment affirmed.

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

Bales v. Griffin, 59 S.E. 316, 3 Ga. App. 97, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 564 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

59 S.E. 316 (Bales v. Griffin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Woodcliff Gin Co. v. Kittles
161 S.E. 119 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1931)