Owens v. Cocroft

74 S.E. 1098, 11 Ga. App. 235, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 341
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedJune 5, 1912
Docket3929
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 74 S.E. 1098 (Owens v. Cocroft) 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
Owens v. Cocroft, 74 S.E. 1098, 11 Ga. App. 235, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 341 (Ga. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

The first grant of a new trial will not he disturbed by the Court of Appeals unless the plaintiff in error shows that the law and the facts require the verdict notwithstanding the judgment of the presiding judge. Civil Code (1910), § 6204; Hughes v. Atlanta Steel Co., 9 Ga. App. 510 (71 S. E. 934), and cases cited. This rule applies though two new trials have been granted, one to the plaintiff and the other to the defendant. Jordan v. Dooly, 129 Ga. 392. In this case the hill of exceptions and the record fail to show that the verdict rendered was demanded by the law and the evidence, and the judgment granting a new trial must be Affirmed.

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

Related

Elder v. Woodruff Hardware & Manufacturing Co.
91 S.E. 942 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 S.E. 1098, 11 Ga. App. 235, 1912 Ga. App. LEXIS 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owens-v-cocroft-gactapp-1912.