Davis v. Searle

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Davis v. Searle

69 S.E. 1086, 8 Ga. App. 553, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 41

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 24, 1911

Docket2549

StatusPublished

This text of 69 S.E. 1086 (Davis v. Searle) 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

Davis v. Searle, 69 S.E. 1086, 8 Ga. App. 553, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 41 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

Powell, J.

1. The verdict, of-the jury settles all issues of fact; and there is some evidence to sustain it.

2. The alleged prejudicial remark of the court in confining the investigation to relevant matters constitutes no reversible error.

3. For the court t.o send out the appeal papers in an appeal case with the jury trying the ease is not erroneous.

4. It is not erroneous for the court to allow a party voluntarily to write off a portion of his claim or of his recovery, though he thereby renders some alleged error harmless. Judgment affirmed.

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

Powell, J.

1. The verdict, of-the jury settles all issues of fact; and there is some evidence to sustain it.

2. The alleged prejudicial remark of the court in confining the investigation to relevant matters constitutes no reversible error.

3. For the court t.o send out the appeal papers in an appeal case with the jury trying the ease is not erroneous.

4. It is not erroneous for the court to allow a party voluntarily to write off a portion of his claim or of his recovery, though he thereby renders some alleged error harmless. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 S.E. 1086, 8 Ga. App. 553, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 41, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-searle-gactapp-1911.