Griffith v. Sellers
This text of 153 S.E. 359 (Griffith v. Sellers) 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.
Opinion
“This case is controlled by the well settled rule, that where it does not appear that the verdict was demanded under the law and the evidence, the first grant of a new trial will not be disturbed, though based on a specified ground of the motion, .without regard to the merit of such ground. Smith v. Hightower, 123 Ga. 110 (51 S. E. 28).” Atlantic & Birmingham R. Co. v. Cobb, 125 Ga. 121 (53 S. E. 591). “This court will not closely scrutinize the facts in evidence or endeavor to balance with great exactness the testimony on both sides with a view to detecting an abuse of discretion by the trial judge. The exercise of that discretion in favor of granting new trials should be encouraged.” Georgia Midland & Gulf R. Co. v. Curry, 90 Ga. 250 (15 S. E. 751). Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
153 S.E. 359, 170 Ga. 577, 1930 Ga. LEXIS 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/griffith-v-sellers-ga-1930.