Claude Nolan Motor Co. v. Cowart

Supreme Court of Georgia

Claude Nolan Motor Co. v. Cowart

165 S.E. 9, 175 Ga. 153, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 211

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJuly 15, 1932

DocketNo. 9067

StatusPublished

This text of 165 S.E. 9 (Claude Nolan Motor Co. v. Cowart) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Claude Nolan Motor Co. v. Cowart, 165 S.E. 9, 175 Ga. 153, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 211 (Ga. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

1. The single special ground of the motion for a new trial complains that the court erred in admitting, over timely objection, a document called “double guarantee,” shown in the statement of the ease following. Under the pleadings and the evidence this ground does not show error.

2. The verdict is supported by evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Hester & Lewis, for plaintiff in error. Frederick A. Tuten, contra.

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

Gilbert, J.

1. The single special ground of the motion for a new trial complains that the court erred in admitting, over timely objection, a document called “double guarantee,” shown in the statement of the ease following. Under the pleadings and the evidence this ground does not show error.

2. The verdict is supported by evidence.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur. Hester & Lewis, for plaintiff in error. Frederick A. Tuten, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 S.E. 9, 175 Ga. 153, 1932 Ga. LEXIS 211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claude-nolan-motor-co-v-cowart-ga-1932.