Clements v. Citizens Banking Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Clements v. Citizens Banking Co.

85 S.E. 935, 16 Ga. App. 636, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 170

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 2, 1915

Docket5802

StatusPublished

This text of 85 S.E. 935 (Clements v. Citizens Banking Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Clements v. Citizens Banking Co., 85 S.E. 935, 16 Ga. App. 636, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 170 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, C. J.

The suit was upon two notes, one for $1,000 and the other for $270. There being no evidence charging the holder of the $1,000 note with notice as to any defense to it, the verdict in favor of the plaintiff as to this note was demanded. The verdict in favor of the plaintiff - as to the $270 note was supported by the evidence. There was no material error in the instructions given, and the requests for instructions, so far as they were pertinent, were sufficiently covered in the charge as delivered. If fuller instructions had been desired as to certain other portions of the charge to which exceptions are taken, an appropriate and timely request therefor should have been submitted. The charge as a whole clearly and fairly submitted the issues, and is especially to be commended in that the instructions were concretely applied to the testimony as it had been delivered to the jury, and in that it did not consist of abstract statements of the law without specific application. The court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, J., dissents.

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

Russell, C. J.

The suit was upon two notes, one for $1,000 and the other for $270. There being no evidence charging the holder of the $1,000 note with notice as to any defense to it, the verdict in favor of the plaintiff as to this note was demanded. The verdict in favor of the plaintiff - as to the $270 note was supported by the evidence. There was no material error in the instructions given, and the requests for instructions, so far as they were pertinent, were sufficiently covered in the charge as delivered. If fuller instructions had been desired as to certain other portions of the charge to which exceptions are taken, an appropriate and timely request therefor should have been submitted. The charge as a whole clearly and fairly submitted the issues, and is especially to be commended in that the instructions were concretely applied to the testimony as it had been delivered to the jury, and in that it did not consist of abstract statements of the law without specific application. The court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 S.E. 935, 16 Ga. App. 636, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clements-v-citizens-banking-co-gactapp-1915.