Barge v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Barge v. State

70 S.E. 965, 9 Ga. App. 226, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 480

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 11, 1911·No. 3210·Published

Opinion

I-Iiix, C. J.

1. This court will not interfere with the discretion of the trial judge in refusing to allow the attorney for the movant further time in which to amend' the motion for a new trial, unless it clearly appears that such discretion was manifestly abused. In the present ease there was no abuse of discretion.

2. No error of law appears, and the verdict is fully supported by the evidence. Judgment affirmed,.

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

I-Iiix, C. J.

1. This court will not interfere with the discretion of the trial judge in refusing to allow the attorney for the movant further time in which to amend' the motion for a new trial, unless it clearly appears that such discretion was manifestly abused. In the present ease there was no abuse of discretion.

2. No error of law appears, and the verdict is fully supported by the evidence. Judgment affirmed,.

Barge v. State, 70 S.E. 965, 9 Ga. App. 226, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 480 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

70 S.E. 965 (Barge v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.