Heath v. Clark

80 S.E. 288, 141 Ga. 65, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 321
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided November 17, 1913·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. As a rule, that a witness after the trial of a.ease states that he made a mistake in his testimony will not cause a new trial. Especially is this true where there are other witnesses who have not changed their testimony, and who testified substantially to the same facts as those testified to by the witness first mentioned. O’Kelly v. Felker, 71 Ga. 775; Clark v. State, 117 Ga. 254 (43 S. E. 853).

2. The court’s instruction to the jury that “when one has been actually in possession of land for more than seven years under a claim of right, such claim shall be respected by the proeessioners,” is not objectionable on the ground that this charge “is not applicable to processioning cases.” Johnson v. Reeves, 133 Ga. 822 (66 S. E. 1081).

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Heath v. Clark, 80 S.E. 288, 141 Ga. 65, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 321 (Ga. 1913).

80 S.E. 288 (Heath v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stevens v. Calder
10 S.E.2d 751 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1940)
Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway Co. v. Patterson
165 S.E. 897 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1932)
Wiggins v. James
116 S.E. 547 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Field v. Proctor
106 S.E. 91 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1921)