Hartley v. Head
This text of 71 Ga. 95 (Hartley v. Head) 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
The plaintiff in error cited the defendant before the court of ordinary for a settlement of his accounts as her guardian. The case was carried to .the superior court by appeal. The defendant pleaded the statute of limitations, [96]*96and upon the trial it was shown that plaintiff, the ward, became of age in the year 1870, and that this proceeding was commenced November, 1882. Plaintiff testified that defendant, when she demanded a settlement, said that he had better keep her money, that it would do her more good, and promised that he would settle with her. The court charged the jury that, if these facts were true, she was barred by the statute; this ruling is made a ground of error in the motion for new trial. If this testimony is true, the charge of the court was right, and there was no error in refusing the new trial here. See Code, §2922; 56 Ga., 684; 66 Ga., 255 ; 60 Ga., 449 ; 61 Ga., 356.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
71 Ga. 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartley-v-head-ga-1883.