Johnson v. Redwine Bros.

95 S.E. 315, 21 Ga. App. 811, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 540
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided March 12, 1918·No. 8958·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Jenkins, J.

1. This court is without authority to entertain an objection to the sufficiency of the approval of the grounds of the amendment to a motion for a new trial, when it does not appear that such objection was raised and insisted upon before the trial judge at the time the motion was entertained by him. Ga. L. 1911, p. 150, see. 3.

2. On the trial of a claim interposed to a levy on certain cotton, it was error to reject evidence offered for the purpose of showing that the defendant in fi. fa., in selling the cotton to the claimant, was acting solely as the delegated agent of his landlord, in whom title lay. Such testimony was relevant as a part of the history of the transaction showing title in the claimant, and was not to be rejected as tending to show title in a stranger to the record. Tuttle v. Exchange Bank,. 90 Ga. 653 (16 S. E. 955); Carter v. Brown, 4 Ga. App. 238 (61 S. E. 142).

Judgment reversed.

Wade,. O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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

Johnson v. Redwine Bros., 95 S.E. 315, 21 Ga. App. 811, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 540 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

95 S.E. 315 (Johnson v. Redwine Bros.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Georgia State Bank v. Harden
124 S.E. 68 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Irvin v. State
118 S.E. 764 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)