Beavers v. Howell

140 S.E. 525, 37 Ga. App. 351, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 672
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided November 16, 1927·No. 18321·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Brovles, C. J.

1. None of the grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial (many of them too incomplete within themselves to be considered) shows cause for a reversal of the judgment below.

2. There was some evidence authorizing the verdict, and, the finding of the jui’y having been approved by the trial judge, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. James A. Fori, for plaintiff in error. Zach. Childers, contra.

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

Beavers v. Howell, 140 S.E. 525, 37 Ga. App. 351, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

140 S.E. 525 (Beavers v. Howell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People v. Rivera Palmer
51 P.R. 702 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1937)
Pueblo v. Rivera Palmer
51 P.R. Dec. 725 (Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, 1937)