Goodman v. Brown

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Goodman v. Brown

88 S.E. 593, 17 Ga. App. 778, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 930

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 17, 1916

Docket6706

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 88 S.E. 593 (Goodman v. Brown) 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

Goodman v. Brown, 88 S.E. 593, 17 Ga. App. 778, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 930 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

In order to warrant the setting aside of a verdict and judgment, on the ground that the defendant was, by reason of sickness, prevented from being present at the trial, it is incumbent upon the movant to show that he was injured by such absence, that he had a meritorious defense, and that, had he been present, there would probably have been a different result and one more favorable to him. See McCall v. Miller, 120 Ga. 268 (47 S. E. 920); Phillips v. Taber, 83 Ga. 565, 566 (10 S. E. 270); Ferrill v. Marks, 76 Ga. 21; Peacock v. Usry, 52 Ga. 354. The defendant having failed to comply with this well-settled rule, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the extraordinary motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Russell, G. J., absent.

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

Wade, J.

In order to warrant the setting aside of a verdict and judgment, on the ground that the defendant was, by reason of sickness, prevented from being present at the trial, it is incumbent upon the movant to show that he was injured by such absence, that he had a meritorious defense, and that, had he been present, there would probably have been a different result and one more favorable to him. See McCall v. Miller, 120 Ga. 268 (47 S. E. 920); Phillips v. Taber, 83 Ga. 565, 566 (10 S. E. 270); Ferrill v. Marks, 76 Ga. 21; Peacock v. Usry, 52 Ga. 354. The defendant having failed to comply with this well-settled rule, the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the extraordinary motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Russell, G. J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 S.E. 593, 17 Ga. App. 778, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goodman-v-brown-gactapp-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack