Dalton Fruit & Produce Co. v. Puryear
This text of 96 S.E. 344 (Dalton Fruit & Produce Co. v. Puryear) 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. The statement by the court to the jury, complained of in the motion for a new trial, was not erroneous for the reason assigned, namely, that it was an undue intimation that the minority should accept the viewpoint of the majority and make a verdict. Compare White v. Fulton, 68 Ga. 511 (3); Central R. &c. Co. v. Neighbors, 83 Ga. 444 (2), 447 (10 S. E. 115),; Parker v. Ga. Pac. Ry. Co., 83 Ga. 539 (8, 9), 548 (10 S. E. 233); Golatt v. State, 130 Ga. 18 (3), 21 (60 S. E. 107).
2. There was evidence sufficient to support the finding of the jury that the mule’s death was caused by negligence of the defendant’s agent in / overfeeding it; and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
96 S.E. 344, 22 Ga. App. 489, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 566, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dalton-fruit-produce-co-v-puryear-gactapp-1918.