Burdette v. Davis

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Burdette v. Davis

132 S.E. 779, 35 Ga. App. 275, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 693

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 20, 1926

Docket16742

StatusPublished

This text of 132 S.E. 779 (Burdette v. Davis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burdette v. Davis, 132 S.E. 779, 35 Ga. App. 275, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 693 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, J.

In this action for a malicious use of legal process, the verdict found for the plaintiff was authorized, under the pleadings and the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the general grounds of the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The special grounds of the motion, not being referred to in the brief filed by the defendant’s counsel, are treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur. Parker & Patterson, for plaintiff in error. H. A. Allen, contra.

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

Bell, J.

In this action for a malicious use of legal process, the verdict found for the plaintiff was authorized, under the pleadings and the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the general grounds of the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

The special grounds of the motion, not being referred to in the brief filed by the defendant’s counsel, are treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur. Parker & Patterson, for plaintiff in error. H. A. Allen, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E. 779, 35 Ga. App. 275, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burdette-v-davis-gactapp-1926.