Teem v. Town of Ellijay

Supreme Court of Georgia

Teem v. Town of Ellijay

15 S.E. 33, 89 Ga. 154

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided March 31, 1892·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

[155] Judgment affirmed.

The verdict was in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff moved for a new trial on the grounds, that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer to that part of the declaration setting out the tortious act of plaintiff and the resulting and direct damages growing out of the levy of thefi.fa. The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

C. D. Phillips and Gr. R. Brown, for plaintiff. Clay & Blair and J. P. Perry, contra.

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

[155] Judgment affirmed.

The verdict was in favor of the defendant. The plaintiff moved for a new trial on the grounds, that the verdict was contrary to law and evidence, and that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer to that part of the declaration setting out the tortious act of plaintiff and the resulting and direct damages growing out of the levy of thefi.fa. The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

C. D. Phillips and Gr. R. Brown, for plaintiff. Clay & Blair and J. P. Perry, contra.

Teem v. Town of Ellijay, 15 S.E. 33, 89 Ga. 154 (Ga. 1892).

Pincite

15 S.E. 33 (Teem v. Town of Ellijay) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related