Hinkle v. Story
22 S.E. 333, 96 Ga. 776
Opinion
There was no legal merit in the motion for a continu-, anee; and as, under the facts in evidence, the property levied on was manifestly, and beyond doubt, subject to the plaintiffs’ exe* cution, there was no error in directing a verdict accordingly.
Judgment affirmed,.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hinkle v. Story, 22 S.E. 333, 96 Ga. 776 (Ga. 1895).
22 S.E. 333 (Hinkle v. Story) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Daniel v. State
163 S.E.2d 863 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Stewart v. Bank of Social Circle
28 S.E. 249 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)