Stotesbury v. Lanier
42 Ga. 120
Opinion
The testimony of the plaintiff, offered on the trial, was properly ruled out by the Court, as against the administrator, whose intestate was dead. The plaintiff, having failed to make out his ease, by any evidence which would entitle him to a verdict, the Court should have dismissed the same, and it was error, to allow the defendant to take a verdict in his favor.
Let the judgment of the Court be reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Stotesbury v. Lanier, 42 Ga. 120 (Ga. 1871).
42 Ga. 120 (Stotesbury v. Lanier) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
SOUTHWIND TRUCKING CO., INC. v. Harvey
101 S.E.2d 223 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Crawford v. Irwin
85 S.E.2d 8 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1954)
Sprinz v. Frank, Heyman & Rhine
7 S.E. 177 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1888)
Ford v. Kennedy
64 Ga. 537 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1880)