Stalnaker v. Beach

88 S.E. 991, 18 Ga. App. 172, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 199
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided May 26, 1916·No. 6997·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

.Broyles, J.

1. The first grant of a new trial will not be disturbed unless it appears “that the judge abused his discretion in granting it, and that the law and facts required the verdict notwithstanding the judgment of the presiding judge.” Civil Code, § 6204.

(a) Where a verdict rendered in a justice’s court is not demanded by the evidence, a judgment sustaining a certiorari and ordering a new trial in the justice’s court stands upon the same footing as the ordinary first grant of a new trial. Jeffers v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co., 1 Ga. App. 331 (57 S. E. 923).

2. There was no error in the sustaining of the certiorari by the judge of the superior'court; or in his judgment ordering a new trial in the justice’s court. Judgment affirmed.

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

Stalnaker v. Beach, 88 S.E. 991, 18 Ga. App. 172, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 199 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

88 S.E. 991 (Stalnaker v. Beach) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Dougherty County Council of Architects v. Beckanstin
112 S.E.2d 423 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)
Skipper v. Overall
171 S.E. 310 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1933)
Parker v. Bridges
95 S.E. 321 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)
Ellis v. Spell
93 S.E. 49 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)