Rosenbusch v. Lester Book & Stationery Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rosenbusch v. Lester Book & Stationery Co.

85 S.E. 675, 16 Ga. App. 539, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 115

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 28, 1915

Docket6148

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 85 S.E. 675 (Rosenbusch v. Lester Book & Stationery Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rosenbusch v. Lester Book & Stationery Co., 85 S.E. 675, 16 Ga. App. 539, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 115 (Ga. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

Though the testimony was somewhat uncertain' and' unsatisfactory, there was some evidence to support the finding in favor of the plaintiff; and therefore the judge of the superior court did hot err in declining to sanction the petition for certiorari, which set forth no reversible error. If there was even slight evidence to support the verdict or judgment of which complaint was made, he was under no obligation to sanction the petition, unless some sufficient legal'efror' appeared therein. We repeat what was said by this court in Meeks v. Carter, 5 Ga. App. 421-423 (63 S. E. 517), that, in cases brought up by exceptions to a refusal to sanction or to a judgment overruling a certiorari, “we do not propose to reverse the judgment for minor and trivial errors, when it is plain that substantial justice, or a close approximation thereto, has been done,” and where there is any evidence to support the verdict or judgment objected to as being without evidence to support it.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Wade, J.

Though the testimony was somewhat uncertain' and' unsatisfactory, there was some evidence to support the finding in favor of the plaintiff; and therefore the judge of the superior court did hot err in declining to sanction the petition for certiorari, which set forth no reversible error. If there was even slight evidence to support the verdict or judgment of which complaint was made, he was under no obligation to sanction the petition, unless some sufficient legal'efror' appeared therein. We repeat what was said by this court in Meeks v. Carter, 5 Ga. App. 421-423 (63 S. E. 517), that, in cases brought up by exceptions to a refusal to sanction or to a judgment overruling a certiorari, “we do not propose to reverse the judgment for minor and trivial errors, when it is plain that substantial justice, or a close approximation thereto, has been done,” and where there is any evidence to support the verdict or judgment objected to as being without evidence to support it.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 S.E. 675, 16 Ga. App. 539, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 115, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rosenbusch-v-lester-book-stationery-co-gactapp-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack