Roberts & Hughey v. Harris

32 Ga. 542
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMarch 15, 1861
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 32 Ga. 542 (Roberts & Hughey v. Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Roberts & Hughey v. Harris, 32 Ga. 542 (Ga. 1861).

Opinion

By the Cowt.

Lumpkin, J.,

delivering the opinion.

On the trial the defendant objected to the reading of Benjamin’s Whitehead’s interrogatories, on the ground that the ninth cross-interrogatory was not answered. This objection is covered by the waiver of .defendant’s counsel, J. K. Strickland. It is in these words: “All objections to the execution and return of this set of interrogatories (meaning Whitehead’s) are hereby waived.” The whole of Whitehead’s testimony was objected to because it proved a special contract, and was inadmissible under the pleadings. We do not think there is anything in this objection.

[546]*546The complaint has a bill of particulars attached to it, setting out that the rent was for so much per annum, payable quarterly, and with interest on each quarter as it fell due. This is as special as a bill for specific performance, as special as the O. S. pleadings.

We see no error in the charge of the Court, and think that the verdict was in conformity to the charge and to the testimony in the case.

Let the judgment be affirmed.

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

Related

Roberts v. Leak
33 S.E. 995 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1899)
Talbotton Railroad v. Gibson
32 S.E. 151 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Tumlin v. Bass Furnace Co.
20 S.E. 44 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
32 Ga. 542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roberts-hughey-v-harris-ga-1861.