Ocilla Southern Railroad v. Prickett
111 S.E. 81, 28 Ga. App. 383, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 533
Opinion
Under the evidence submitted, this court does not feel authorized to set aside the verdict and judgment on the general grounds of the motion for a new trial. See Whitcomb v. Payne, 27 Ga. App. 722 (109 S. E. 703). The portion of the charge complained of is in all [384]*384respects substantially the same as that approved by this court in Ocilla Southern R. Co. v. McInvale, 26 Ga. App. 106 (105 S. E. 451), and the exceptions taken to the charge in this case are controlled by the rulings made in that case.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Ocilla Southern Railroad v. Prickett, 111 S.E. 81, 28 Ga. App. 383, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 533 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).
111 S.E. 81 (Ocilla Southern Railroad v. Prickett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ocilla Southern Railroad v. McInvale
105 S.E. 451 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1920)
Whitcomb v. Payne
109 S.E. 703 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1921)