Selman v. Arp

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Selman v. Arp

132 S.E. 781, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 659

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 14, 1926

Docket17077

StatusPublished

This text of 132 S.E. 781 (Selman v. Arp) 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

Selman v. Arp, 132 S.E. 781, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 659 (Ga. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

The verdict for the plaintiff, who sued for services rendered in nursing, waiting upon, and attending the defendant’s intestate, was authorized; and the special grounds of the motion for a new trial, which complain of the admission of testimony over the objection of plaintiff in error, are without merit. Eor no reason assigned did the court err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., concurs. Bloodworih, J., not participating, on account of illness.

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

Luke, J.

The verdict for the plaintiff, who sued for services rendered in nursing, waiting upon, and attending the defendant’s intestate, was authorized; and the special grounds of the motion for a new trial, which complain of the admission of testimony over the objection of plaintiff in error, are without merit. Eor no reason assigned did the court err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., concurs. Bloodworih, J., not participating, on account of illness.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 S.E. 781, 35 Ga. App. 242, 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/selman-v-arp-gactapp-1926.