Fisher & Son v. Watson

Supreme Court of Georgia

Fisher & Son v. Watson

158 S.E. 584, 172 Ga. 699, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 182

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 12, 1931·No. No. 8190·Published

Opinion

Gilbert, J.

The exception is to a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial. The proceeding was instituted for the purpose of enjoining the sale of a mare mule under a tax fi. fa. The petitioner insisted that the mule was not subject to the whole of the tax demanded, $12.36, because it also represented the tax on property other than the mule, alleging a willingness to pay the amount of the tax on the animal in question. Held, that under the evidence the court did not err in directing the verdict for the defendant. The special ground ofy the motion for a new trial does not require a reversal, and is not of such character as to require special detailed mention.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Gilbert, J.

The exception is to a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial. The proceeding was instituted for the purpose of enjoining the sale of a mare mule under a tax fi. fa. The petitioner insisted that the mule was not subject to the whole of the tax demanded, $12.36, because it also represented the tax on property other than the mule, alleging a willingness to pay the amount of the tax on the animal in question. Held, that under the evidence the court did not err in directing the verdict for the defendant. The special ground ofy the motion for a new trial does not require a reversal, and is not of such character as to require special detailed mention.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Fisher & Son v. Watson, 158 S.E. 584, 172 Ga. 699, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 182 (Ga. 1931).

Pincite

158 S.E. 584 (Fisher & Son v. Watson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.