Pierce v. Barton & Son

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Pierce v. Barton & Son

113 S.E. 225, 28 Ga. App. 630, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 736

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 13, 1922

Docket13470

StatusPublished

This text of 113 S.E. 225 (Pierce v. Barton & Son) 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

Pierce v. Barton & Son, 113 S.E. 225, 28 Ga. App. 630, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 736 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The special assignment of error upon the ground that the court failed to charge that the burden of proof was on the plaintiff is without merit. There was no request for a more specific charge upon this subject. The charge of the court is sufficiently full upon the issues in the case.

2. The assignment of error upon an excerpt from the charge of the court, to the effect that it was an expression of opinion on the evidence, is without merit. Nor was the excerpt error for any other reason assigned.

3. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the verdict has approval of the trial judge. For no reason assigned was it error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur. E. D. Kenyon, for plaintiff in error. Charters, Wheeler & Lilly, contra.

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