Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. State

86 S.E. 223, 144 Ga. 108, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 1
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided September 17, 1916·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Beck,- J.

1. The exception being to the first grant of a new trial, and it not appearing that the verdict rendered was demanded by the evidence, the judgment awarding a new trial will not be disturbed.

2. Under the ruling in the case of Ogletree v. Livingston, 125 Ga. 548 (54 S. E. 625), the grant of a new trial being affirmed, the exceptions pendente lite will not be passed upon, as the case is still pending in the court below.

3. Questions as to the admissibility of evidence and the correctness of certain charges of the court are not passed upon, as the case, under the grant of a new trial by the court below, will be tried de novo at the next hearing.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, 0. •/., absent.

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

Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. State, 86 S.E. 223, 144 Ga. 108, 1916 Ga. LEXIS 1 (Ga. 1916).

86 S.E. 223 (Peninsular Naval Stores Co. v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sullivan v. Dixon
34 S.E.2d 318 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Conwell v. Price
24 S.E.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1943)
National Life & Accident Insurance v. Cantrell
175 S.E. 543 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)