Cutts v. Watt-Harley-Holmes Co.

73 S.E. 592, 10 Ga. App. 417, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 543
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 30, 1912
Docket3204
StatusPublished

This text of 73 S.E. 592 (Cutts v. Watt-Harley-Holmes 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.

Bluebook
Cutts v. Watt-Harley-Holmes Co., 73 S.E. 592, 10 Ga. App. 417, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 543 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Russell, J.

The evidence, though conflicting, supported the verdict rendered, and none of the assignments of error are of sufficient materiality to have required the grant of a new trial. This verdict being the second verdict in behalf of the plaintiff, and being approved by the trial judge, it will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed. Pottle, J., not -presiding.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 S.E. 592, 10 Ga. App. 417, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 543, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cutts-v-watt-harley-holmes-co-gactapp-1912.