Rome Railway & Light Co. v. Barrett

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rome Railway & Light Co. v. Barrett

68 S.E. 334, 7 Ga. App. 780, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 516

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 14, 1910·No. 2374·Published

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

The questions of law made by the assignments of error are neither novel nor of general interest. The verdict is strongly supported by the evidence, and no error of law appears, of sufficient gravity to justify the grant of another trial. Judgment affirmed.

Action for damages; from city court of Floyd county — Judge ¡Hamilton. December 13, 1909.

'Submitted February 25, Decided June 14, 1910. Dean ■& Dean, for plaintiff in error: C. T. Clements, John W. & G. E. Maddox, contra.

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

Hill, C. J.

The questions of law made by the assignments of error are neither novel nor of general interest. The verdict is strongly supported by the evidence, and no error of law appears, of sufficient gravity to justify the grant of another trial. Judgment affirmed.

Action for damages; from city court of Floyd county — Judge ¡Hamilton. December 13, 1909.

'Submitted February 25, Decided June 14, 1910. Dean ■& Dean, for plaintiff in error: C. T. Clements, John W. & G. E. Maddox, contra.

Rome Railway & Light Co. v. Barrett, 68 S.E. 334, 7 Ga. App. 780, 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 516 (Ga. Ct. App. 1910).

Pincite

68 S.E. 334 (Rome Railway & Light Co. v. Barrett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.