Sapp Bros. v. Mathis

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Sapp Bros. v. Mathis

77 S.E. 102, 12 Ga. App. 273, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 536

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 11, 1913

Docket4276

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 77 S.E. 102 (Sapp Bros. v. Mathis) 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

Sapp Bros. v. Mathis, 77 S.E. 102, 12 Ga. App. 273, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 536 (Ga. Ct. App. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Russell, J.

1. A verdict in favor of the plaintiffs was not authorized, unless limited to those items in the account the sale of which was positively proved by one of the witnesses for the plaintiffs; and for this reason the court did not err in sustaining, the certiorari and remanding the case for a new trial.

2. The magistrate’s answer not disclosing that a copy of the summons and cause of action was served upon the defendant personally, and this fact not otherwise appearing in the record, there is nothing to indicate that the plaintiffs were entitled to a verdict, under the provisions of § 4730 of the Civil Code, without proof of the account. Judgment affirmed.

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

Russell, J.

1. A verdict in favor of the plaintiffs was not authorized, unless limited to those items in the account the sale of which was positively proved by one of the witnesses for the plaintiffs; and for this reason the court did not err in sustaining, the certiorari and remanding the case for a new trial.

2. The magistrate’s answer not disclosing that a copy of the summons and cause of action was served upon the defendant personally, and this fact not otherwise appearing in the record, there is nothing to indicate that the plaintiffs were entitled to a verdict, under the provisions of § 4730 of the Civil Code, without proof of the account. Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

77 S.E. 102, 12 Ga. App. 273, 1913 Ga. App. LEXIS 536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sapp-bros-v-mathis-gactapp-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack