Sikes v. Beavers

Supreme Court of Georgia

Sikes v. Beavers

157 S.E. 467, 172 Ga. 180, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 49

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 12, 1931

DocketNo. 7895

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 157 S.E. 467 (Sikes v. Beavers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sikes v. Beavers, 157 S.E. 467, 172 Ga. 180, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 49 (Ga. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Hill, J.

The motion for new trial contains the general grounds only. No error of law is alleged to have been committed on the trial of the case. After reviewing the evidence, it is held that the same is sufficient to support the verdict; and the court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial for' any reason assigned.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Beck, P. J., absent for providential cause. R. L. Maynard and W W. Dykes, for plaintiffs. James A. Fort, for defendants.

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

Hill, J.

The motion for new trial contains the general grounds only. No error of law is alleged to have been committed on the trial of the case. After reviewing the evidence, it is held that the same is sufficient to support the verdict; and the court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial for' any reason assigned.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Beck, P. J., absent for providential cause. R. L. Maynard and W W. Dykes, for plaintiffs. James A. Fort, for defendants.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 S.E. 467, 172 Ga. 180, 1931 Ga. LEXIS 49, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sikes-v-beavers-ga-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack