Seabolt v. Lewis

63 S.E.2d 894, 207 Ga. 691, 1951 Ga. LEXIS 498
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 12, 1951·No. No. 17386·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Atkinson, Presiding Justice.

This being the first grant of a new trial, in. a suit between coterminous landowners to enjoin the cutting of timber, where the evidence was in conflict as to the location of the dividing line, the evidence did not demand a finding in favor of the defendant; and, accordingly, it cannot be held as a matter of law that the judge abused his discretion in granting a new trial, after having directed a verdict in favor of the defendant. Code, § 6-1608; Van Giesen v. Queen Insurance Co., 132 Ga. 515 (64 S. E. 456); Glenn v. Tankersley, 187 Ga. 129 (200 S. E. 709).

Judgment affirmed,.

All the Justices concur. Wheeler, Robinson & Thurmond, for plaintiff in error. G. Fred Kelley and C. H. Edwards, contra.

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

Seabolt v. Lewis, 63 S.E.2d 894, 207 Ga. 691, 1951 Ga. LEXIS 498 (Ga. 1951).

63 S.E.2d 894 (Seabolt v. Lewis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lewis v. Seabolt
71 S.E.2d 519 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1952)