Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Lamb v. Sewell

Lamb v. Sewell

92 S.E. 1011, 20 Ga. App. 250, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 843
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 15, 1917·No. 8135·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Wade, O. J.

1. The value of the opinion given in the plaintiff’s testimony as to the speed of the train which struck her, based upon the facts she stated, or the sufficiency or insufficiency of these facts to authorize the opinion given by the witness, was a matter to be determined by the jury; and the court did not err in admitting the testimony.

2. The requested instructions which the court declined to give 'to the jury were, so far as pertinent and legal, sufficiently covered by the charge of the court.

3. There is no substantial merit in any of the special grounds of the motion for a new trial; there was evidence to support the verdict, and the trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

George and Luhe, JJ., concur.

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

Lamb v. Sewell, 92 S.E. 1011, 20 Ga. App. 250, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 843 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

92 S.E. 1011 (Lamb v. Sewell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Bradley
147 S.E.2d 853 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Cupp v. State
143 S.E.2d 197 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Hart
99 S.E.2d 302 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Hammond v. State
91 S.E.2d 615 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1956)
Ellison v. Evans
69 S.E.2d 94 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Hall v. Kendall
59 S.E.2d 421 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1950)
Bell v. State
183 S.E. 93 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Hansberger Motor Transportation Co. v. Pate
181 S.E. 796 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)