Dodgen v. Fowler

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dodgen v. Fowler

147 S.E. 775, 39 Ga. App. 515, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 388

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 9, 1929·No. 19374·Published

Opinion

Luke, J.

The evidence in the record being in sharp conflict as to material matters, this case comes within the rule that the first grant of a new trial will not be disturbed when the verdict is not demanded by the law and the facts. Civil Code (1910), § 6204; Douglas v. Hardin, 161 Ga. 838 (2) (131 S. E. 896); Carr v. Carr, 157 Ga. 208 (121 S. E. 227) ; Parks v. Stevens, 21 Ga. App. 180 (94 S. E. 60) ; Louisville, & Nashville R. Co. v. Barksdale, 34 Ga. App. 812 (131 S. E. 298).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. John T. Dorsey, John G. Bell, Morris, Hawlcins & Wallace, for plaintiffs in error. Mozley & Gann, L. M. Blair, contra.

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

Luke, J.

The evidence in the record being in sharp conflict as to material matters, this case comes within the rule that the first grant of a new trial will not be disturbed when the verdict is not demanded by the law and the facts. Civil Code (1910), § 6204; Douglas v. Hardin, 161 Ga. 838 (2) (131 S. E. 896); Carr v. Carr, 157 Ga. 208 (121 S. E. 227) ; Parks v. Stevens, 21 Ga. App. 180 (94 S. E. 60) ; Louisville, & Nashville R. Co. v. Barksdale, 34 Ga. App. 812 (131 S. E. 298).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. John T. Dorsey, John G. Bell, Morris, Hawlcins & Wallace, for plaintiffs in error. Mozley & Gann, L. M. Blair, contra.

Dodgen v. Fowler, 147 S.E. 775, 39 Ga. App. 515, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 388 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

147 S.E. 775 (Dodgen v. Fowler) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related