Benson v. Hays
This text of 84 S.E. 543 (Benson v. Hays) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. Tlie general grounds of the motion for a new trial are not referred to in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, and, under repeated rulings of this court, will be treated as abandoned.
2. Under the pleadings and evidence in this case, whether or not the plaintiff by the exercise of ordinary care could have avoided the consequences of the alleged negligence of the defendant was a question for the jury. Miller v. Smythe, 95 Ga. 288 (22 S. E. 532).
3. The grounds of the amended motion for a new trial, which complained in some instances of excerpts from the charge, and in others of omissions to charge without request, and others of refusals of requests to charge, furnish no cause for the grant of a new trial, when considered in the light of the evidence and the entire charge as given.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
84 S.E. 543, 143 Ga. 216, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 357, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/benson-v-hays-ga-1915.