Morrison v. Cureton

Supreme Court of Georgia

Morrison v. Cureton

77 S.E. 160, 139 Ga. 299, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 409

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided January 21, 1913·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. There was no error in charging the jury in accordance with admissions of the parties, made in open court on the trial of the case.

(a) The omission to charge that in arriving at a verdict the jury could consider certain enumerated facts and circumstances furnishes no ground for reversal. If such a charge would have been proper, an appropriate request therefor should have been duly made.

2. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and there was no abuse of discretion in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Jtistices concur.

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

Atkinson, J.

1. There was no error in charging the jury in accordance with admissions of the parties, made in open court on the trial of the case.

(a) The omission to charge that in arriving at a verdict the jury could consider certain enumerated facts and circumstances furnishes no ground for reversal. If such a charge would have been proper, an appropriate request therefor should have been duly made.

2. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict, and there was no abuse of discretion in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Jtistices concur.

Morrison v. Cureton, 77 S.E. 160, 139 Ga. 299, 1913 Ga. LEXIS 409 (Ga. 1913).

Pincite

77 S.E. 160 (Morrison v. Cureton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related