Hulsey v. Chapman

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hulsey v. Chapman

11 S.E.2d 845, 63 Ga. App. 682, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 527

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 20, 1940

Docket28520.

StatusPublished

This text of 11 S.E.2d 845 (Hulsey v. Chapman) 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

Hulsey v. Chapman, 11 S.E.2d 845, 63 Ga. App. 682, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 527 (Ga. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Gardner, J.

1. The plaintiff in the court below testified positively, in support of the allegations of his petition, to the effect that under the contract he cut 62,798 feet of lumber at forty cents per hundred for sawing, and ten cents per hundred for logging, and that $172.60 was the balance due for the work. The original record of entries and testimony of its correctness was admitted. The testimony of the defendant was vague and uncertain, and negative in character, and was not sufficient in any material particular to form an issue for a jury to pass upon. The evidence demanded a verdict for the plaintiff.

2. The special assignments of error are without merit. The court did not err in directing the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Gardner, J.

1. The plaintiff in the court below testified positively, in support of the allegations of his petition, to the effect that under the contract he cut 62,798 feet of lumber at forty cents per hundred for sawing, and ten cents per hundred for logging, and that $172.60 was the balance due for the work. The original record of entries and testimony of its correctness was admitted. The testimony of the defendant was vague and uncertain, and negative in character, and was not sufficient in any material particular to form an issue for a jury to pass upon. The evidence demanded a verdict for the plaintiff.

2. The special assignments of error are without merit. The court did not err in directing the verdict.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 S.E.2d 845, 63 Ga. App. 682, 1940 Ga. App. LEXIS 527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hulsey-v-chapman-gactapp-1940.