Glover v. Maddox

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Glover v. Maddox

116 S.E.2d 523, 102 Ga. App. 425, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 640

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 23, 1960

Docket38443

StatusPublished

This text of 116 S.E.2d 523 (Glover v. Maddox) 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

Glover v. Maddox, 116 S.E.2d 523, 102 Ga. App. 425, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 640 (Ga. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Frankum, Judge.

This case has been tried three times in Floyd Superior Court. The first two trials resulted in verdicts for the plaintiff which were reversed in Glover v. Maddox, 98 Ga. App. 548 (106 S. E. 2d 288), and Glover v. Maddox, 100 Ga. App. 262 (111 S. E. 2d 164), to which [426]*426reference is made for a detailed statement of facts. On the third trial a verdict was returned for the defendant. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial and later amended to add one special ground. On April 29, 1960, after argument of counsel, the trial judge granted the motion for a new trial, and to such ruling the defendant excepts and assigns same as error.

Decided September 23, 1960. Cook (fc Palmour, A. Cecil Palmour, for plaintiff in error. Glower & Anderson, Fullbright & Duffey, Iienry J. Fullbright, Jr., contra.

The evidence in the instant case is not vastly different from that on the prior trials. The plaintiff testified that he did not agree to a specific contingent fee of $5,000, to be associated with the defendant in a case. On the contrary, the defendant testified that the plaintiff did agree to the specific fee. Suffice it to say, the evidence did not demand a finding for the plaintiff or for the defendant. Under the ruling of Dennard v. Styles, 101 Ga. App. 459 (114 S. E. 2d 317) (and cases cited therein), the trial judge has now exercised his discretion to grant a new trial, and we cannot find that he has abused such discretion.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., Townsend and Carlisle, JJ., concur.

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

Frankum, Judge.

This case has been tried three times in Floyd Superior Court. The first two trials resulted in verdicts for the plaintiff which were reversed in Glover v. Maddox, 98 Ga. App. 548 (106 S. E. 2d 288), and Glover v. Maddox, 100 Ga. App. 262 (111 S. E. 2d 164), to which [426]*426reference is made for a detailed statement of facts. On the third trial a verdict was returned for the defendant. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial and later amended to add one special ground. On April 29, 1960, after argument of counsel, the trial judge granted the motion for a new trial, and to such ruling the defendant excepts and assigns same as error.

Decided September 23, 1960. Cook (fc Palmour, A. Cecil Palmour, for plaintiff in error. Glower & Anderson, Fullbright & Duffey, Iienry J. Fullbright, Jr., contra.

The evidence in the instant case is not vastly different from that on the prior trials. The plaintiff testified that he did not agree to a specific contingent fee of $5,000, to be associated with the defendant in a case. On the contrary, the defendant testified that the plaintiff did agree to the specific fee. Suffice it to say, the evidence did not demand a finding for the plaintiff or for the defendant. Under the ruling of Dennard v. Styles, 101 Ga. App. 459 (114 S. E. 2d 317) (and cases cited therein), the trial judge has now exercised his discretion to grant a new trial, and we cannot find that he has abused such discretion.

Judgment affirmed.

Gardner, P. J., Townsend and Carlisle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

116 S.E.2d 523, 102 Ga. App. 425, 1960 Ga. App. LEXIS 640, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glover-v-maddox-gactapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack