Cobb v. Coffey

99 S.E. 864, 149 Ga. 264, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 221
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 17, 1919·No. No. 1190·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Hill, J.

1. The assignment of error, complaining of the refusal of the judge to allow a witness on direct examination to answer a question, which fails to specify what the witness would have testified had he been permitted to answer the question, is insufficient to present any question for decision. Rogers v. Condon, 144 Ga. 390 (3) (87 S. E. 397); Featherston v. American National Bank, 146 Ga. 13 (90 S. E. 282).

2. Applying the principles announced in the former rulings in this case the court did not err, under the, pleadings and evidence, in granting a non-suit. Coffey v. Cobb, 140 Ga. 661 (79 S. E. 568); s. c. 143 Ga. 539 (85 S. E. 693); s. c. 146 Ga. 689 (92 S. E. 57); Cobb v. Coffey, 148 Ga. 101 (95 S. E. 966).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Cobb v. Coffey, 99 S.E. 864, 149 Ga. 264, 1919 Ga. LEXIS 221 (Ga. 1919).

99 S.E. 864 (Cobb v. Coffey) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Blackburn
44 S.E.2d 555 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1947)
Thompson v. State
11 S.E.2d 795 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Trammell v. Shirley
145 S.E. 486 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Wyche v. Bank of Campbell County
130 S.E. 566 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)
Clare v. Drexler
110 S.E. 176 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1921)