Scott v. Scott

179 S.E. 593, 51 Ga. App. 94, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 571
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 8, 1935
Docket24607
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 179 S.E. 593 (Scott v. Scott) 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
Scott v. Scott, 179 S.E. 593, 51 Ga. App. 94, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 571 (Ga. Ct. App. 1935).

Opinion

Guekrt, J.

1. Where the entire evidence of a witness is set out in a ground of motion for new trial, and it is apparent from a reading thereof that some of the evidence of the witness is relevant and admis[95]*95sible, this court will not consider objections made in general terms to the entire testimony. Luke v. State, 26 Ga. App. 175 (106 S. E. 199); City of Atlanta v. Sciple, 19 Ga. App. 694 (92 S. E. 28); American Insurance Company v. Bailey & Musgrove, 6 Ga. App. 424 (65 S. E. 160).

Decided April 8, 1935. Walter S. Billon, Austin T. Walden, for plaintiff in error. Branch & Howard, Thomas B. Branch Jr., contra.

2. The assignments of error not dealt with above are plainly without merit.

3. The question of title was fairly submitted to the jury by the trial judge, and the evidence was amply sufficient to support the verdict. The court, therefore, did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Related

King v. Sharpe
99 S.E.2d 283 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Dillon v. Sills
187 S.E. 725 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
179 S.E. 593, 51 Ga. App. 94, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 571, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scott-v-scott-gactapp-1935.