Lucas v. Scott-Strother Lumber Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lucas v. Scott-Strother Lumber Co.

132 S.E. 645, 35 Ga. App. 249, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 672

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1926

Docket17101

StatusPublished

This text of 132 S.E. 645 (Lucas v. Scott-Strother Lumber Co.) 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.

Bluebook

Lucas v. Scott-Strother Lumber Co., 132 S.E. 645, 35 Ga. App. 249, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 672 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

This ease is presented upon the sole ground that the evidence does not authorize the verdict. The evidence was most conflicting, but this court can not say that there was no evidence to authorize the verdict. The trial judge having approved the verdict, the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., not parties pating, on account .of illness.

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

Luke, J.

This ease is presented upon the sole ground that the evidence does not authorize the verdict. The evidence was most conflicting, but this court can not say that there was no evidence to authorize the verdict. The trial judge having approved the verdict, the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., concurs. Bloodworth, J., not parties pating, on account .of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E. 645, 35 Ga. App. 249, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucas-v-scott-strother-lumber-co-gactapp-1926.