Peters v. Monroe Oil & Fertilizer Co.
123 S.E. 618, 158 Ga. 523, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 291
Opinion
The motion for new trial consists only of the usual general grounds. No error of law is alleged to have been committed on the trial of the case. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the court did not err in refusing a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Peters v. Monroe Oil & Fertilizer Co., 123 S.E. 618, 158 Ga. 523, 1924 Ga. LEXIS 291 (Ga. 1924).
123 S.E. 618 (Peters v. Monroe Oil & Fertilizer Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Aud v. Aud
34 S.E.2d 655 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)
Penn Mutual Life Insurance v. Blount
140 S.E. 496 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1927)