Gibson v. State

107 S.E. 599, 27 Ga. App. 175, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 760

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 14, 1921·No. 12352·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. The special ground of the motion for a new trial, not having been unconditionally approved by the trial judge, cannot be considered by this court.

2. There is ample evidence to support the verdict, the trial judge has approved it, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur. Hammond Johnson, for plaintiff in error. J. G. Collins, solicitor-general, contra.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. The special ground of the motion for a new trial, not having been unconditionally approved by the trial judge, cannot be considered by this court.

2. There is ample evidence to support the verdict, the trial judge has approved it, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur. Hammond Johnson, for plaintiff in error. J. G. Collins, solicitor-general, contra.

Gibson v. State, 107 S.E. 599, 27 Ga. App. 175, 1921 Ga. App. LEXIS 760 (Ga. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

107 S.E. 599 (Gibson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.