John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Davis
This text of 177 S.E. 822 (John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Davis) 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.
Opinion
1. A charge by the court to a jury as follows: “Gentlemen, take this ease as it has been presented to you from the witness stand, and see what the facts are, and make your verdict,” is error, when the evidence for the complainant consists of documentary evidence and depositions as well as testimony from witnesses on the witness stand. See McLean v. Clark, 47 Ga. 24 (12); Bowden v. Achor, 95 Ga. 243 (22 S. E. 254) ; Myers v. State, 97 Ga. 76 (25 S. E. 252) ; Byrd v. Byrd, 22 Ga. App. 354 (96 S. E. 10) ; English v. Poole, 31 Ga. App. 581 (121 S. E. 589); Atlanta Gas-Light Co. v. Cook, 35 Ga. App. 622 (134 S. E. 198) ; Darden v. Washington, 35 Ga. App. 777 (134 S. E. 813) ; Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Tate, 129 Ga. 526 (59 S. E. 266) ; Stiles v. Shedden, 2 Ga. App. 317 (58 S. E. 515) ; Blandon v. State, 6 Ga. App. 782 (65 S. E. 842); Hilton v. Sylvania & Girard R. Co., 8 Ga. App. 10 (68 S. E. 746); Middleton v. State, 29 Ga. App. 375 (115 S. E. 277); Sikes v. DeLoach, 166 Ga. 887 (144 S. E. 655) ; Hendrix v. Bank of Portal, 169 Ga. 264 (149 S. E. 879).
2. In view of the above ruling, we make no ruling on the general grounds of the motion for a new trial, or on any of the remaining special grounds, which will not likely occur on a retrial of the case.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
177 S.E. 822, 50 Ga. App. 266, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/john-hancock-mutual-life-insurance-v-davis-gactapp-1934.