Chattanooga Pottery Co. v. Tatum Naval Stores Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Chattanooga Pottery Co. v. Tatum Naval Stores Co.

66 S.E. 479, 7 Ga. App. 179, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 575

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided December 10, 1909·No. 2063·Published

Opinion

Russell, J.

The verdict rendered was not demanded by the evidence; and und'er the facts disclosed by this record, there was no error in the first grant of a new trial, even though such new trial was granted by a judge other than he who presided at the trial of the cause.

Judgment affirmed.

Complaint; from city court of Sylvester — Judge Park. June 19, 1909.

Argued November 18, Decided December 10, 1909. Glande Payton, Pope & Bennet, for plaintiff in error. T. B. Perry, J. II. Tipton, J. B. Williams, W. E. Talley, contra..

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

Russell, J.

The verdict rendered was not demanded by the evidence; and und'er the facts disclosed by this record, there was no error in the first grant of a new trial, even though such new trial was granted by a judge other than he who presided at the trial of the cause.

Judgment affirmed.

Complaint; from city court of Sylvester — Judge Park. June 19, 1909.

Argued November 18, Decided December 10, 1909. Glande Payton, Pope & Bennet, for plaintiff in error. T. B. Perry, J. II. Tipton, J. B. Williams, W. E. Talley, contra..

Chattanooga Pottery Co. v. Tatum Naval Stores Co., 66 S.E. 479, 7 Ga. App. 179, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 575 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

66 S.E. 479 (Chattanooga Pottery Co. v. Tatum Naval Stores Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.