Thompson v. Marietta Trust & Banking Co.
This text of 94 S.E. 631 (Thompson v. Marietta Trust & Banking Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. The court did not err in allowing the amendment to the plea and answer.
2. This case is here on a direct bill of exceptions in which the only as[464]*464signment of error, other than that disposed of above, is that the court erred in awarding a nonsuit. No proper brief of the evidence is in the bill of exceptions, or made a part of the record; and the case is controlled by the ruling made in Tidwell v. Alabama Great Southern R. Co., 20 Ga. App. 826 (93 S. E. 511). See also Civil Code (1910), §§ 6140, 6141; Crumbley v. Brooke, 135 Ga. 723 (70 S. E. 655); Cunningham v. Strom, 8 Ga. App. 87 (68 S. E. 616).
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
94 S.E. 631, 21 Ga. App. 463, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-marietta-trust-banking-co-gactapp-1917.