Ford v. Harden
This text of 94 S.E.2d 720 (Ford v. Harden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Whore, as in this case, the petition was in two counts, in which the prayer was for a money judgment in a slated amount in the first count, and for reformation of a contract and for the stated amount in count two, and the jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum sued for and the judgment followed the verdict, the prayer for reformation was not granted, hence the Court of Appeals and not this court has jurisdiction of the writ of error; the exception being to the failure to grant a motion for new trial in which the jury returned a verdict for a money judgment, and the writ of error must be [625]*625Transí erred to the Court o] Appeals.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
94 S.E.2d 720, 212 Ga. 624, 1956 Ga. LEXIS 471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-harden-ga-1956.