Salmon v. Rogers

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Salmon v. Rogers

155 S.E. 507, 42 Ga. App. 183, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 285

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedOctober 7, 1930

Docket20679

StatusPublished

This text of 155 S.E. 507 (Salmon v. Rogers) 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

Salmon v. Rogers, 155 S.E. 507, 42 Ga. App. 183, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 285 (Ga. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. In the light of the facts of the ease and the entire charge of the court, the alleged errors of commission and of omission in the charge do not require a reversal of the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial.

2. The verdict in favor of the defendant was amply authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

1. In the light of the facts of the ease and the entire charge of the court, the alleged errors of commission and of omission in the charge do not require a reversal of the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial.

2. The verdict in favor of the defendant was amply authorized by the evidence, and the refusal to grant a new trial was not error.

Judgment affirmed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 S.E. 507, 42 Ga. App. 183, 1930 Ga. App. LEXIS 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salmon-v-rogers-gactapp-1930.