Bullard v. Southern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Bullard v. Southern Railway Co.

34 S.E. 1002, 110 Ga. 304, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 387

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Bullard v. Southern Railway Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 116 Ga. 644 →

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided January 30, 1900·Published

Opinion

Fish, J.

1. There was no error in excluding evidence.

2. The facts of this case clearly bring it within the principle announced in Briscoe v. Southern Railway Co., 103 Ga. 224, and consequently there was no error in granting a nonsuit.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

Action for damages. Before Judge Reid. City court of Atlanta. March term, 1899.

F. Roland Alston and Westmoreland Brothers, for plaintiff. Dorsey, Brewster & Dowell and Banders McDaniel, for defendant.

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

Fish, J.

1. There was no error in excluding evidence.

2. The facts of this case clearly bring it within the principle announced in Briscoe v. Southern Railway Co., 103 Ga. 224, and consequently there was no error in granting a nonsuit.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

Action for damages. Before Judge Reid. City court of Atlanta. March term, 1899.

F. Roland Alston and Westmoreland Brothers, for plaintiff. Dorsey, Brewster & Dowell and Banders McDaniel, for defendant.

Bullard v. Southern Railway Co., 34 S.E. 1002, 110 Ga. 304, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 387 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

34 S.E. 1002 (Bullard v. Southern Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

1. There was no error in excluding evidence.

Related