Harbin v. Flannigan
95 S.E. 320, 22 Ga. App. 30, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 119
Opinion
1. Tlie reference in the brief of counsel for the' plaintiff in error to the grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial does not amount to an argument, and these grounds will be treated as abandoned. Mills v. State, 19 Ga. App. 623 (1), 624 (91 S. E. 918), and cases cited; Laffitte v. State, 105 Ga. 595 (1), 596 (31 S. E. 540); Moss v. Bohanon, 111 Ga. 871 (36 S. E. 954).
2. There Is evidence to support the verdict, which has the approval of the trial judge, and this court will not interfere.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Harbin v. Flannigan, 95 S.E. 320, 22 Ga. App. 30, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 119 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).
95 S.E. 320 (Harbin v. Flannigan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Southern Railway Co. v. Whitehead
120 S.E. 700 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
O'Neal v. State
100 S.E. 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1919)