Citizens Auto Co. v. State

132 S.E. 258, 35 Ga. App. 166, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 599
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided March 2, 1926·No. 16925·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where a proceeding is instituted under the act approved March 28, 1917 (Park’s Code Supp. (Penal), § 448 (oooo)), to condemn an automobile alleged to have been used in conveying intoxicating liquors over a designated public road, and the evidence does not demand a finding that the vehicle was used in conveying liquors “on the public roads named in the petition,” the direction of a verdict “for confiscation” is reversible error. Wells v. State, 33 Ga. App. 426 (126 S. E. 856).

2. Special grounds 1 and-2 of the motion for a new trial, complaining of the exclusion of certain documentary evidence, present nothing for adjudication, for the reason that the rejected evidence is not set forth therein either literally or in substance, nor attached as an exhibit to the motion. Shaw v. Jones, 133 Ga. 446 (9) (66 S. E. 240) ; Holton v. State, 29 Ga. App. 387 (115 S. E. 284) ; Bank of LaGrange v. Commercial Credit Co., 31 Ga. App. 529 (121 S. E. 142).

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., eoneur.

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

Citizens Auto Co. v. State, 132 S.E. 258, 35 Ga. App. 166, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 599 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

132 S.E. 258 (Citizens Auto Co. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Calhoun v. Williamson
174 S.E. 806 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)
Frey v. Sessions Loan & Trust Co.
144 S.E. 35 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)