Cook v. Kilgo

Supreme Court of Georgia

Cook v. Kilgo

35 S.E. 673, 111 Ga. 817, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 749

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedApril 7, 1900

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 35 S.E. 673 (Cook v. Kilgo) 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

Cook v. Kilgo, 35 S.E. 673, 111 Ga. 817, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 749 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. An exception to the overruling of a motion to rulé out “all evidence that went behind the settlement,” without setting forth either literally or in substance the evidence referred to, will not be considered. Petty v. Brunswick & W. Ry. Co., 109 Ga. 666, and cases cited.

2. There being no specific assignment of error upon the charge excepted to, [818]*818this court will not consider it further than to determine whether'it states a correct principle of law. Anderson v. Southern Ry. Co., 107 Ga. 500. This charge as an abstract proposition was good law.

Submitted March 14, — Decided April 7, 1900.

Complaint. Before Judge Estes. Habersham superior court. March term, 1899.

J. G. Edwards and J. W. Owen, for plaintiff in error. J. B. Jones, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

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