Crider v. Haygood

105 S.E. 866, 26 Ga. App. 320
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 15, 1921
Docket11833
StatusPublished

This text of 105 S.E. 866 (Crider v. Haygood) 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
Crider v. Haygood, 105 S.E. 866, 26 Ga. App. 320 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Opinion

Hill, J.

Where counsel for the parties could not agree on a brief of the evidence, and the trial judge stated that “he would, not attempt to settle any differences or disputes between counsel, for the reason that he did not remember the evidence, the case having been tried fifteen months before,” there was no error in dismissing the motion for a new trial, the “movant not presenting for approval and filing a correct brief of the evidence.” Williams v. Johnson, 94 Ga. 722 (19 S. E. 888); Lucas v. Cordele Guano Co., 106 Ga. 200 (32 S. E. 120) ; Baldwin County v. Crawford, 101 Ga. 185 (28 S. E. 621).

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Related

Williams v. Johnston
19 S.E. 888 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)
Baldwin County v. Crawford
28 S.E. 621 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)
Lucas v. Cordele Guano Co.
32 S.E. 120 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
105 S.E. 866, 26 Ga. App. 320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crider-v-haygood-gactapp-1921.