Friedlander v. Feingold

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Friedlander v. Feingold

147 S.E. 535, 39 Ga. App. 410, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 342

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 5, 1929

Docket19380

StatusPublished

This text of 147 S.E. 535 (Friedlander v. Feingold) 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

Friedlander v. Feingold, 147 S.E. 535, 39 Ga. App. 410, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 342 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. The special grounds of the motion for a new trial are based on alleged errors in the charge of the court. We find no error in any of the instructions complained of. The charge given was clear and correct.

2. The evidence supports the verdict, which has the approval of the judge who tried the case, and a. new trial was properly refused.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. The special grounds of the motion for a new trial are based on alleged errors in the charge of the court. We find no error in any of the instructions complained of. The charge given was clear and correct.

2. The evidence supports the verdict, which has the approval of the judge who tried the case, and a. new trial was properly refused.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 S.E. 535, 39 Ga. App. 410, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 342, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedlander-v-feingold-gactapp-1929.