Gurney v. Wittern

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gurney v. Wittern

154 S.E. 294, 41 Ga. App. 672

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJuly 19, 1930

Docket20193

StatusPublished

This text of 154 S.E. 294 (Gurney v. Wittern) 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

Gurney v. Wittern, 154 S.E. 294, 41 Ga. App. 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

The evidence authorized the inference that the plaintiff as transferee was the owner of the account sued on, and that the account as it appeared from the books of the transferor, with the credits there[673]*673on given to the defendant, was just, true, due, and unpaid. The verdict, in the amount found for the plaintiff, was authorized, and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari brought by the defendant, wherein the defendant excepted to the judgment of the appellate division of the municipal court of Atlanta, affirming the judgment of the trial judge of the municipal court, overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial, which was based upon the general grounds only.

Decided July 19, 1930. Burr ess & Dillard, for plaintiff in error. A. R. Dorsey, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenhins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

The evidence authorized the inference that the plaintiff as transferee was the owner of the account sued on, and that the account as it appeared from the books of the transferor, with the credits there[673]*673on given to the defendant, was just, true, due, and unpaid. The verdict, in the amount found for the plaintiff, was authorized, and the judge of the superior court did not err in overruling the certiorari brought by the defendant, wherein the defendant excepted to the judgment of the appellate division of the municipal court of Atlanta, affirming the judgment of the trial judge of the municipal court, overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial, which was based upon the general grounds only.

Decided July 19, 1930. Burr ess & Dillard, for plaintiff in error. A. R. Dorsey, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenhins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

154 S.E. 294, 41 Ga. App. 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gurney-v-wittern-gactapp-1930.