Smith v. Smith

Supreme Court of Georgia

Smith v. Smith

146 S.E.2d 721, 221 Ga. 619, 1966 Ga. LEXIS 648

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedJanuary 6, 1966

Docket23219

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 146 S.E.2d 721 (Smith v. Smith) 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

Smith v. Smith, 146 S.E.2d 721, 221 Ga. 619, 1966 Ga. LEXIS 648 (Ga. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

“Whenever a motion for directed verdict, made at the close of all the evidence, is denied, or for any reason is not granted, a party who has” so moved may make a further motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or'the mistrial as the case may be. (Emphasis supplied). Code Ann. § 110-113 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 440, 441; 1957, pp. 224, 236). Here, after a request for a continuance on account of illness of counsel for the plaintiff after examination of only two witnesses for the plaintiff, the motion by the defendant for directed verdict was not in order. See Green v. Green, 138 Ga. 581 (2) (75 SE 603); Spivey v. Barwick, 157 Ga. 853 (122 SE 594); Cowart v. Smith, 182 Ga. 511 (185 SE 819). Nor was the motion for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial in order, and the lower court erred in granting same.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Duckworth, Chief Justice.

“Whenever a motion for directed verdict, made at the close of all the evidence, is denied, or for any reason is not granted, a party who has” so moved may make a further motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict or'the mistrial as the case may be. (Emphasis supplied). Code Ann. § 110-113 (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 440, 441; 1957, pp. 224, 236). Here, after a request for a continuance on account of illness of counsel for the plaintiff after examination of only two witnesses for the plaintiff, the motion by the defendant for directed verdict was not in order. See Green v. Green, 138 Ga. 581 (2) (75 SE 603); Spivey v. Barwick, 157 Ga. 853 (122 SE 594); Cowart v. Smith, 182 Ga. 511 (185 SE 819). Nor was the motion for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial in order, and the lower court erred in granting same.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 S.E.2d 721, 221 Ga. 619, 1966 Ga. LEXIS 648, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-smith-ga-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack