Pittsburgh Spring Co. v. Smith & Sons

42 S.E. 80, 115 Ga. 764, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 572
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 11, 1902·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Lumpkin, P. J.

1. The defendant having joined issue with the plaintiffs without demurring to their petition, and they having introduced sufficient testimony to prove their case as laid, the verdict in their favor was warranted. Savannah Railway Co. v. Ladson, 114 Ga. 762.

2. The failure of the court to charge upon a ground of defense not set up in the defendant’s answer certainly does not entitle the latter to a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lewis, J., absent. Attachment. Before Judge Reagan. Pike superior court. December 7, 1901. G. D. Dominick and A. A. Murphey, for plaintiff in error. W. W. Lambdin, contra.

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

Pittsburgh Spring Co. v. Smith & Sons, 42 S.E. 80, 115 Ga. 764, 1902 Ga. LEXIS 572 (Ga. 1902).

42 S.E. 80 (Pittsburgh Spring Co. v. Smith & Sons) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Davis v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
131 S.E. 490 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. Stanley
57 S.E. 1042 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Kelly v. Strouse & Bros.
43 S.E. 280 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1903)