Corley v. Carolina Portland Cement Co.
This text of 125 S.E. 771 (Corley v. Carolina Portland Cement 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.
Opinion
1. It is well settled by repeated rulings of the Supreme Court and of this court, that an assignment of error upon the refusal to award a nonsuit will not be considered, where thereafter the case proceeded to a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and the defendant’s motion for a new trial (to the overruling of which exception is taken) includes the ground that the verdict was contrary to the evidence and without evidence to support it.
2. Under the facts of the case and the rulings in Wight v. Hester, 24 Ga. 485 (4); Boehm v. Juehter, 62 Ga. 580 (2), 583 (2); Wimpy v. Gaskill, 79 Ga. 620 (2) (7 S. E. 156); Nixon v. Christie, 84 Ga. 469 (10 S. E. 1087), and Burge v. State, 133 Ga. 431 (2), 432 (66 S. E. 243), the court did not err in overruling the ground of the motion for a new trial which was based upon alleged newly discovered evidence.
3. The judge tried the case without the intervention of a jury, and the judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff was authorized under the law and the evidence.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
125 S.E. 771, 33 Ga. App. 170, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 799, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/corley-v-carolina-portland-cement-co-gactapp-1924.