Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Garland
65 S.E. 384, 133 Ga. 175, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 179
Opinion
1. The evidence, while conflicting, ivas sufficient to authorize the verdict.
2. The portions of the charge excepted to were not erroneous for any reason assigned.
3. The written requests to charge, upon refusal to give which error is assigned, were not in themselves perfect and complete statements of the law applicable to the issues sought to be covered by them, and the court did not err in refusing to embody such requests in his instructions to the jury.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Garland, 65 S.E. 384, 133 Ga. 175, 1909 Ga. LEXIS 179 (Ga. 1909).
65 S.E. 384 (Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Garland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ex Rel. Reinhart v. Callahan
229 P. 702 (Nevada Supreme Court, 1924)