Miller v. Franklin
This text of 80 S.E. 549 (Miller v. Franklin) 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
1. The question as to whether certain guano was furnished by the landlord, or by another, being a matter of fact, for determination by the jury, and there being sufficient evidence to authorize the verdict foreclosing the landlord’s lien, it was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial. Henderson v. Hughes, 4 Ga. App. 53 (69 S. E. 813).
2. As appears from the judgment refusing a new trial, the matters dealt with in the disallowed amendment to the answer had been passed upon in a former suit between the same parties. “A judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive between the same parties . . as to all matters put in issue, or which under the rules of law might have been put in issue in the cause wherein the judgment was rendered.” Civil Code, § 4336. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
80 S.E. 549, 14 Ga. App. 180, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-franklin-gactapp-1914.