Byrd v. Olmstead

Supreme Court of Georgia

Byrd v. Olmstead

95 S.E. 224, 147 Ga. 622, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 75

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 13, 1918·No. No. 357·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

1. The evidence did not authorize the court to direct a verdict in behalf of the plaintiff for the land in dispute.

(а) Documents not included in the approved, brief of evidence, nor referred to therein and attached as exhibits, can not be considered.

(б) There was no sufficient assignment of error on the ruling of the court in excluding evidence, the evidence excluded not having been set out in the motion for a new trial, nor attached thereto as an exhibit.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices'concur.

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

Per Curiam.

1. The evidence did not authorize the court to direct a verdict in behalf of the plaintiff for the land in dispute.

(а) Documents not included in the approved, brief of evidence, nor referred to therein and attached as exhibits, can not be considered.

(б) There was no sufficient assignment of error on the ruling of the court in excluding evidence, the evidence excluded not having been set out in the motion for a new trial, nor attached thereto as an exhibit.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices'concur.

Byrd v. Olmstead, 95 S.E. 224, 147 Ga. 622, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 75 (Ga. 1918).

Pincite

95 S.E. 224 (Byrd v. Olmstead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.