Long v. Childers
This text of 166 S.E.2d 369 (Long v. Childers) 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
M. L. Long filed a claim against Judson Childers for damages resulting from a motor vehicle collision. The defendant filed an answer and counterclaim for damages to his automobile. Upon the trial of the case the jury found for the defendant on the original claim and in favor of the plaintiff on the counterclaim.
The plaintiff filed a motion for new trial on the ground that the trial judge erred in admitting certain evidence as to the value [96]*96of the defendant’s automobile immediately prior and subsequent to the collision. The motion was overruled and the case is here for review. Held:
Assuming but not deciding that the admission of the evidence was erroneous, it was not harmful. The jury, having decided the right to recover in any amount adversely to the defendant on his counterclaim, never reached the point of considering the extent of the damages to his automobile. Parsons v. Foshee, 80 Ga. App. 127, 132 (4) (55 SE2d 386); Parsons v. Grant, 95 Ga. App. 431, 435 (98 SE2d 219). The overruling of the motion for new trial was not error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
166 S.E.2d 369, 119 Ga. App. 95, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/long-v-childers-gactapp-1969.