Hawkes Co. v. Cowart Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hawkes Co. v. Cowart Co.

94 S.E. 643, 21 Ga. App. 397, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 602

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 12, 1917

Docket8646

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 94 S.E. 643 (Hawkes Co. v. Cowart Co.) 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

Hawkes Co. v. Cowart Co., 94 S.E. 643, 21 Ga. App. 397, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 602 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

1. Under -repeated rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court of our State, “No ground of a motion for new trial which is not complete and understandable without resorting to an examination of the brief of evidence or the charge of the court will be considered as presenting a question for consideration by this court.” Southern Railway Co. v. Williams, 19 Ga. App. 545 (91 S. E. 1001); Head v. State, 144 Ga. 383 (87 S. E. 273); Smiley v. Smiley, 144 Ga. 546 (87 S. E. 668). In the instant ease each special ground of the motion for new trial refers, to a certain written contract, but this contract is not set out either literally or in substance in any of. Said grounds; and therefore they present no question for determination by this court.

2. “Grounds of the motion for a new trial which complain that the court erred in admitting certain evidence over the objections of the defendant’s counsel, but which fail to state what objection was made at the time it was offered, can not be considered by this court. Clarke v. State, 90 Ga. 448 (16 S. E. 96); Dutton v. State, 92 Ga. 14 (2), 15 (18 S. E. 545) ; Stevens v. State, 93 Ga. 307 (4) (20 S. E. 331); Huff v. State, 85 Ga. 336 (2), 340 (11 S. E. 619) ; Griffin v. State, 86 Ga. 257 (12 S. E. 409) ; Robertson v. State, 87 Ga. 209 (2), 214 (13 S. E. 696).” Cooner v. State, 16 Ga. App. 539 (85 S. E. 688).

3. There was evidence to authorize the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Harwell,, J., concur.

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

Bloodworth, J.

1. Under -repeated rulings of this court and of the Supreme Court of our State, “No ground of a motion for new trial which is not complete and understandable without resorting to an examination of the brief of evidence or the charge of the court will be considered as presenting a question for consideration by this court.” Southern Railway Co. v. Williams, 19 Ga. App. 545 (91 S. E. 1001); Head v. State, 144 Ga. 383 (87 S. E. 273); Smiley v. Smiley, 144 Ga. 546 (87 S. E. 668). In the instant ease each special ground of the motion for new trial refers, to a certain written contract, but this contract is not set out either literally or in substance in any of. Said grounds; and therefore they present no question for determination by this court.

2. “Grounds of the motion for a new trial which complain that the court erred in admitting certain evidence over the objections of the defendant’s counsel, but which fail to state what objection was made at the time it was offered, can not be considered by this court. Clarke v. State, 90 Ga. 448 (16 S. E. 96); Dutton v. State, 92 Ga. 14 (2), 15 (18 S. E. 545) ; Stevens v. State, 93 Ga. 307 (4) (20 S. E. 331); Huff v. State, 85 Ga. 336 (2), 340 (11 S. E. 619) ; Griffin v. State, 86 Ga. 257 (12 S. E. 409) ; Robertson v. State, 87 Ga. 209 (2), 214 (13 S. E. 696).” Cooner v. State, 16 Ga. App. 539 (85 S. E. 688).

3. There was evidence to authorize the verdict, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Harwell,, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

94 S.E. 643, 21 Ga. App. 397, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 602, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkes-co-v-cowart-co-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack