Hartridge, Chisholm & Loyd v. Fry

41 Ga. 104
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 15, 1870
StatusPublished

This text of 41 Ga. 104 (Hartridge, Chisholm & Loyd v. Fry) 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.

Bluebook
Hartridge, Chisholm & Loyd v. Fry, 41 Ga. 104 (Ga. 1870).

Opinion

McCAY, J.

Were it not for the plea of the defendant, and the admission of record there made, we would not disturb this verdict. But we do not think the jury had a right to disregard the admission in the plea. The plaintiffs were not called upon, as the case stood, to make out a case, except for what they [106]*106claimed over and above the admission. To permit the jury to reject this is to entrap the plaintiffs; so long as this plea stood as part of the record, there was no dispute as to the sum admitted. We suppose his Honor, the Judge, did not, in his charge, think of the plea. But the jury were none the less misled.

Judgment reversed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
41 Ga. 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartridge-chisholm-loyd-v-fry-ga-1870.