Crutchfield v. Green

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Crutchfield v. Green

103 S.E. 473, 25 Ga. App. 383, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 818

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 15, 1920

Docket11320

StatusPublished

This text of 103 S.E. 473 (Crutchfield v. Green) 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

Crutchfield v. Green, 103 S.E. 473, 25 Ga. App. 383, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 818 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

“ This court, by the constitutional amendment creating it, is limited in jurisdiction to the correction of errors in law alone, and therefore has no power to grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict is strongly contrary to the weight of evidence, if there is any evidence at all to support it.” Collins v. Broom, 21 Ga. App. 420 (94 S. E. 645), and cases cited. In the order overruling the motion for new trial the judge said: “'No error of law is complained of, and the evidence authorized the verdict, and under the law and facts of this case I do not feel authorized to set aside the verdict.” The trial judge, who has some discretion in setting aside a verdict on conflicting evidence, having refused a new trial, and no error of law having been committed, this court has no authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur. J. C. Barron, for plaintiff in error. F. Holmes Johnson, contra.

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

Bloodworth, J.

“ This court, by the constitutional amendment creating it, is limited in jurisdiction to the correction of errors in law alone, and therefore has no power to grant a new trial on the ground that the verdict is strongly contrary to the weight of evidence, if there is any evidence at all to support it.” Collins v. Broom, 21 Ga. App. 420 (94 S. E. 645), and cases cited. In the order overruling the motion for new trial the judge said: “'No error of law is complained of, and the evidence authorized the verdict, and under the law and facts of this case I do not feel authorized to set aside the verdict.” The trial judge, who has some discretion in setting aside a verdict on conflicting evidence, having refused a new trial, and no error of law having been committed, this court has no authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur. J. C. Barron, for plaintiff in error. F. Holmes Johnson, contra.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 S.E. 473, 25 Ga. App. 383, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 818, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/crutchfield-v-green-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack