Gable v. Gable

223 S.E.2d 646, 236 Ga. 246, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 827
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 11, 1976
Docket30280
StatusPublished

This text of 223 S.E.2d 646 (Gable v. Gable) 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
Gable v. Gable, 223 S.E.2d 646, 236 Ga. 246, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 827 (Ga. 1976).

Opinion

Gunter, Justice.

This appeal is from a judgment that, in pertinent part, said: "That pursuant to the verdict of the jury, the last will and testament of George Christopher Gable be admitted to record as the last will and testament of the said George Christopher Gable by the Probate Court of Douglas County, Georgia.”

The caveators, children of the testator who lost the case before a jury in the trial court, have come here for review of that judgment.

The enumerated errors complain: of a question propounded to jurors during the voir dire examination; of the admission into evidence of an explanation concerning a third witness who notarized, out of the presence of the testator, the signatures of two subscribing witnesses who signed the will in the presence of the testator; that the evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the caveators; that certain admitted evidence should have been excluded; and that a recharge of the jury by the trial judge was erroneous.

Submitted September 2, 1975 Decided February 11, 1976. Ben F. Smith, for appellants. Harold A. Lane, for appellee.

We have reviewed the transcript of the trial and the charge of the court to the jury, and we find no reversible error. There was ample evidence to support the verdict reached by the jury, and the errors urged here, somewhat technical in nature, do not constitute reversible error. The charge of the court fairly presented to the jury the issues for determination, and the jury decided the case adversely to appellants.

The judgment below was correct.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Ingram, J., who concurs in the judgment only.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
223 S.E.2d 646, 236 Ga. 246, 1976 Ga. LEXIS 827, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gable-v-gable-ga-1976.