Talmadge v. Ruby

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Talmadge v. Ruby

83 S.E.2d 40, 90 Ga. App. 299, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 689

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided June 24, 1954·No. 35179·Published

Opinion

Felton, C. J.

In an action on a bond to keep the peace as provided for in Code § 76-202, where the sole issue is whether the party requiring the bond was guilty of provoking by his own conduct the violation of the bond by the other (Code § 76-203), and where the evidence is in conflict as to this issue, the jury’s finding for the defendant is authorized, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial on the general grounds.

Judgment affirmed. Quillian and Nichols, JJ., concur.

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

Felton, C. J.

In an action on a bond to keep the peace as provided for in Code § 76-202, where the sole issue is whether the party requiring the bond was guilty of provoking by his own conduct the violation of the bond by the other (Code § 76-203), and where the evidence is in conflict as to this issue, the jury’s finding for the defendant is authorized, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial on the general grounds.

Judgment affirmed. Quillian and Nichols, JJ., concur.

Talmadge v. Ruby, 83 S.E.2d 40, 90 Ga. App. 299, 1954 Ga. App. LEXIS 689 (Ga. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

83 S.E.2d 40 (Talmadge v. Ruby) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.