Ragsdale v. Turner

Supreme Court of Georgia

Ragsdale v. Turner

156 S.E. 671, 171 Ga. 840, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 477

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided January 24, 1931·No. No. 7842·Published

Opinion

Pek Cukiajm.

1. Under the pleadings and the evidence, which is conflicting, the jury was authorized to And a verdict for the defendant, as they did; and the court did not err in refusing a new trial.

2. None of the special assignments of error in the amendment to the motion for new trial are urged in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, and are treated as abandoned.

3. The trial judge did not err in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concitr.

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

Pek Cukiajm.

1. Under the pleadings and the evidence, which is conflicting, the jury was authorized to And a verdict for the defendant, as they did; and the court did not err in refusing a new trial.

2. None of the special assignments of error in the amendment to the motion for new trial are urged in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, and are treated as abandoned.

3. The trial judge did not err in refusing a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concitr.

Ragsdale v. Turner, 156 S.E. 671, 171 Ga. 840, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 477 (Ga. 1931).

Pincite

156 S.E. 671 (Ragsdale v. Turner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.