City of Rome v. Harbour

Court of Appeals of Georgia

City of Rome v. Harbour

195 S.E. 325, 57 Ga. App. 316, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 580

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 11, 1938·No. 26668·Published

Opinion

Felton, J.

On a former appeal to this court of this case it was adjudged that the petition was not subject to general demurrer. Harbour v. Rome, 54 Ga. App. 97 (187 S. E. 231), which judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court on certiorari. Harbour v. Rome, 184 Ga. 37 (190 S. E. 364). These judgments are the law of this case. The evidence authorized the verdict under the pleadings and it was not error to overrule the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Sutton, J., concur. Ltmhcm & Parker, for plaintiff in error. Maddox ■& Griffin, contra.

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

Felton, J.

On a former appeal to this court of this case it was adjudged that the petition was not subject to general demurrer. Harbour v. Rome, 54 Ga. App. 97 (187 S. E. 231), which judgment was affirmed by the Supreme Court on certiorari. Harbour v. Rome, 184 Ga. 37 (190 S. E. 364). These judgments are the law of this case. The evidence authorized the verdict under the pleadings and it was not error to overrule the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Sutton, J., concur. Ltmhcm & Parker, for plaintiff in error. Maddox ■& Griffin, contra.

City of Rome v. Harbour, 195 S.E. 325, 57 Ga. App. 316, 1938 Ga. App. LEXIS 580 (Ga. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

195 S.E. 325 (City of Rome v. Harbour) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related