Pool v. Duckworth

96 S.E. 179, 148 Ga. 180, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 249
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 14, 1918·No. No. 655·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Beck, P. J.

1. The evidence authorized the verdict. 2. There was no abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court in overruling the ground of the motion for, a new trial based upon the evidence claimed to be nefwly discovered, as the evidence was merely cumulative and impeaching.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.

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

Pool v. Duckworth, 96 S.E. 179, 148 Ga. 180, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 249 (Ga. 1918).

96 S.E. 179 (Pool v. Duckworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. State
149 S.E.2d 426 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Gates v. State
66 S.E.2d 342 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Yatesville Planing Mill Co. v. Johnson
129 S.E. 905 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1925)