Driskell v. Hardin

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Driskell v. Hardin

146 S.E. 349, 39 Ga. App. 208, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 253

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 22, 1929

Docket18991

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 146 S.E. 349 (Driskell v. Hardin) 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

Driskell v. Hardin, 146 S.E. 349, 39 Ga. App. 208, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 253 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

On exceptions to tlie first grant of a new trial,-the only-question that the appellate court will determine is whether the verdict was demanded by the evidence, and this, under the rulings, is true even though the trial judge may have specifically and in terms based his grant of a new trial on some other ground of the motion. Cox v. Grady, 132 Ga. 368, 370 (64 S. E. 262); Gresham v. Lee, 28 Ga. App. 576 (112 S. E. 524); Rowe Brothers Motor Express Co. v. Twiggs County, 152 Ga. 548 (110 S. E. 303). Accordingly, since it is conceded by the plaintiffs in error that the verdict in their favor was not demanded, the judgment of the superior court granting a new trial will be affirmed, without adjudicating whether a contrary verdict was demanded. Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur. Park & Strozier, J. M. Fletcher, for plaintiffs. Ryals, Anderson & Anderson, A. M. Zellner, for defendants.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

On exceptions to tlie first grant of a new trial,-the only-question that the appellate court will determine is whether the verdict was demanded by the evidence, and this, under the rulings, is true even though the trial judge may have specifically and in terms based his grant of a new trial on some other ground of the motion. Cox v. Grady, 132 Ga. 368, 370 (64 S. E. 262); Gresham v. Lee, 28 Ga. App. 576 (112 S. E. 524); Rowe Brothers Motor Express Co. v. Twiggs County, 152 Ga. 548 (110 S. E. 303). Accordingly, since it is conceded by the plaintiffs in error that the verdict in their favor was not demanded, the judgment of the superior court granting a new trial will be affirmed, without adjudicating whether a contrary verdict was demanded. Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur. Park & Strozier, J. M. Fletcher, for plaintiffs. Ryals, Anderson & Anderson, A. M. Zellner, for defendants.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 S.E. 349, 39 Ga. App. 208, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 253, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/driskell-v-hardin-gactapp-1929.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack