Blaylock v. Hackel

Supreme Court of Georgia

Blaylock v. Hackel

142 S.E. 882, 166 Ga. 160, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 244

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Blaylock v. Hackel. Read the opinion of the Court — 164 Ga. 257 →

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 14, 1928·No. No. 6381·Published

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

This was an equitable petition seeking to reform a deed. The exception is to a judgment overruling a motion for new trial, one of the grounds of which complained that the court erred in directing a verdict. Held:

1. The evidence did not demand direction of a verdict. On the contrary there was the issue of fact, to be determined by the jury, of whether or not the land conveyed by the deed was sold by the acre or by the tract.

2. The grounds of the motion contained in the amendment neither show error nor require mention.

Judgment reversed.

All the Jusliees eonour.

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

Gilbert, J.

This was an equitable petition seeking to reform a deed. The exception is to a judgment overruling a motion for new trial, one of the grounds of which complained that the court erred in directing a verdict. Held:

1. The evidence did not demand direction of a verdict. On the contrary there was the issue of fact, to be determined by the jury, of whether or not the land conveyed by the deed was sold by the acre or by the tract.

2. The grounds of the motion contained in the amendment neither show error nor require mention.

Judgment reversed.

All the Jusliees eonour.

Blaylock v. Hackel, 142 S.E. 882, 166 Ga. 160, 1928 Ga. LEXIS 244 (Ga. 1928).

Pincite

142 S.E. 882 (Blaylock v. Hackel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.