Rafter v. Talmadge & Co.
94 S.E. 229, 147 Ga. 407, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 220
Opinion
No other verdict than that directed by the court would have been authorized under the pleadings and the evidence; and there was no error in the rulings of the court rejecting certain evidence offered, and in refusing the proposed amendment to the intervention.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rafter v. Talmadge & Co., 94 S.E. 229, 147 Ga. 407, 1917 Ga. LEXIS 220 (Ga. 1917).
94 S.E. 229 (Rafter v. Talmadge & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Green v. Hall
108 S.E. 42 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1921)