Lewis v. Armstrong
This text of 57 Ga. 127 (Lewis v. Armstrong) 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
The motion for new trial embraced several grounds — error in the charge, error in refusing to charge, conflict of the verdict with the evidence and with the charge of the court, providential absence of one of the attorneys of the plaintiff in error from the trial on account of sickness, he being both leading counsel and a material witness. The court granted the motion generally, discerning in the case as a whole, no doubt, [128]*128good reason for ordering a new trial. We are well satisfied with this result, and do not care to scrutinize, separately, the several grounds of the motion. If we were clear that no one of them, taken alone, should be held sufficient, we would not interfere, for the general presentation of all of them together is decisive. There should be no hesitation in conceding to the presiding judge very ample discretion in granting a first new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
57 Ga. 127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lewis-v-armstrong-ga-1876.