Roper v. Roberts
This text of 84 S.E. 553 (Roper v. Roberts) 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.
Opinion
1. The overruling of a ground of a motion for a new trial which complains that certain interrogatories were not executed by the two commissioners agreed upon, but which failed to show that written notice of the exception to their execution had been given as required by [129]*129the Civil Code (1910), § 5904, or that the interrogatories had not been of file in the clerk’s office for more than twenty-four hours before the trial, furnishes no ground for reversal. Rogers v. Truett, 73 Ga. 386.
2. “Admissions of one of the parties to the suit, given in evidence by the other, need not be referred to specially in charging the jury, where no request to do so is made by either party.” Hawkins v. Kermode, 85 Ga. 116 (11 S. E. 560).
3. There was no merit in any of the other grounds of the motion for a new trial. The verdict was supported by the evidence, and there was no error in overruling the motion for new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
84 S.E. 553, 143 Ga. 128, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roper-v-roberts-ga-1915.