Georgia Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Marshall

207 Ga. 314
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedOctober 9, 1950
DocketNo. 17198
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 207 Ga. 314 (Georgia Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Marshall) 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
Georgia Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Marshall, 207 Ga. 314 (Ga. 1950).

Opinion

Head, Justice.

1. “Every fact or circumstance serving to elucidate or throw light upon the issue being tried, constitutes proper evidence in the case.” Sample v. Lipscomb, 18 Ga. 687; Walker v. Roberts, 20 Ga. 15; Alexander v. State, 7 Ga. App. 89 (66 S. E. 274).

2. The evidence excluded, if believed by the jury, would have authorized a finding that the defendant in error had admitted execution of the deed alleged by him to be a forgery. Code, § 38-403. The testimony excluded contradicted the testimony of the defendant in error as to the execution of the deed.

3. The weight and sufficiency of evidence is solely a matter for the jury, and any relevant testimony which logically tends to prove, or disprove, any material fact at issue in the case should not be excluded from the jury’s consideration.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Grant, Wiggins, Grizzard & Smith, for plaintiffs in error. Bill A. Shirley, Alton T. Milam, and Gordon A. Smith, contra.

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

Related

Shivers v. Shivers
111 S.E.2d 376 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1959)
GA. SAVINGS BANK & TRUST CO. v. Marshall
61 S.E.2d 469 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
207 Ga. 314, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/georgia-savings-bank-trust-co-v-marshall-ga-1950.