Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Flanigan v. Armour Fertilizer Works

Flanigan v. Armour Fertilizer Works

120 S.E. 646, 31 Ga. App. 339, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 938
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedDecember 7, 1923
Docket14753
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 120 S.E. 646 (Flanigan v. Armour Fertilizer Works) 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
Flanigan v. Armour Fertilizer Works, 120 S.E. 646, 31 Ga. App. 339, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 938 (Ga. Ct. App. 1923).

Opinion

Jenkins, B. J.

In this action upon a promissory note covering the purchase price of fertilizer, the defendant at the trial admitted the execution of the note. The record shows that all the evidence offered to sustain his plea was excluded. There are no exceptions to such exclusion, and the motion for a new trial is limited to the general grounds and an exception to the direction of a verdict for the plaintiff. The verdict being demanded and no question of law arising, the court properly overruled the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Whitmer Co. v. Sheffield
181 S.E. 119 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Brilliant Coal Co. v. Gandy
180 S.E. 379 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
120 S.E. 646, 31 Ga. App. 339, 1923 Ga. App. LEXIS 938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/flanigan-v-armour-fertilizer-works-gactapp-1923.