Houseman v. Voak
This text of 121 S.E. 119 (Houseman v. Voak) 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
1. There was no error in allowing the witness to testify , to the alleged, statement of the testatrix that she had made no will. It was admissible as evidence on the question of undue influence and mental capacity of the testatrix. Credille v. Credille, 123 Ga. 673 (51 S. E. 628, 107 Am. St. R. 157); Hubbard v. Rutherford, 148 Ga. 238 (96 S. E. 327); Pennington v. Perry, 156 Ga. 103 (118 S. E. 710); Dennis v. Weekes, 51 Ga. 25.
2. There is no 'exception to the charge of the court, and the evidence was ■ sufficient to authorize the verdict; and the finding of the jury being approved by the trial judge, his discretion in refusing a new trial will not be disturbed. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
121 S.E. 119, 157 Ga. 122, 1923 Ga. LEXIS 378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/houseman-v-voak-ga-1923.