Georgia Railroad v. Jolles

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Georgia Railroad v. Jolles

93 S.E. 23, 20 Ga. App. 353, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 895

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 27, 1917

Docket8059

StatusPublished

This text of 93 S.E. 23 (Georgia Railroad v. Jolles) 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

Georgia Railroad v. Jolles, 93 S.E. 23, 20 Ga. App. 353, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 895 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

George, J.

1. The evidence authorized the verdict, and there is no merit in the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.

2. The amendment to the motion for a new trial complains of error in the court’s charge. Some of the excerpts quoted from the charge, and specially assigned as error, are not entirely accurate; but, the whole charge considered, the ease was fairly tried. None of the alleged errors require a reversal of the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

George, J.

1. The evidence authorized the verdict, and there is no merit in the general grounds of the motion for a new trial.

2. The amendment to the motion for a new trial complains of error in the court’s charge. Some of the excerpts quoted from the charge, and specially assigned as error, are not entirely accurate; but, the whole charge considered, the ease was fairly tried. None of the alleged errors require a reversal of the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

Wade, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 S.E. 23, 20 Ga. App. 353, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 895, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgia-railroad-v-jolles-gactapp-1917.