Gillespie v. Gillespie

Supreme Court of Georgia

Gillespie v. Gillespie

113 S.E. 697, 154 Ga. 189, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 326

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 16, 1922

DocketNo. 2999

StatusPublished

This text of 113 S.E. 697 (Gillespie v. Gillespie) 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

Gillespie v. Gillespie, 113 S.E. 697, 154 Ga. 189, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 326 (Ga. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, P. J.

This was an extraordinary motion for a new trial, based upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. The court refused to issue a rule nisi and to grant a new trial. Held: Much of the evidence submitted as newly discovered was cumulative and impeaching, and as to the other the court was authorized to find that it might have been discovered by the exercise of due diligence before the verdict rendered in the trial, which resulted adversely to the movant; and the court did not err in refusing to grant a rule nisi and in overruling the motion.

■Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, P. J.

This was an extraordinary motion for a new trial, based upon the ground of newly discovered evidence. The court refused to issue a rule nisi and to grant a new trial. Held: Much of the evidence submitted as newly discovered was cumulative and impeaching, and as to the other the court was authorized to find that it might have been discovered by the exercise of due diligence before the verdict rendered in the trial, which resulted adversely to the movant; and the court did not err in refusing to grant a rule nisi and in overruling the motion.

■Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 S.E. 697, 154 Ga. 189, 1922 Ga. LEXIS 326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gillespie-v-gillespie-ga-1922.