Ford v. Harden

94 S.E.2d 720, 212 Ga. 624, 1956 Ga. LEXIS 471
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 10, 1956
Docket19447
StatusPublished

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.

Bluebook
Ford v. Harden, 94 S.E.2d 720, 212 Ga. 624, 1956 Ga. LEXIS 471 (Ga. 1956).

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

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.

Argued September 10, 1956 Decided October 10, 1956. Rupert A. Brown, Ben F. Cheek, R. Howard Gordon, for plaintiff in error. Johnson & Johnson, R. U. Harden, Marshall L. Allison, contra. All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., not participating.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.