Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Callaway, McCarty & Gregory
This text of 36 S.E. 967 (Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Callaway, McCarty & Gregory) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
1. When the time for filing in vacation a brief of evidence to accompany a motion for a new trial is expressly limited by an order of the court, and the brief is not filed within that time, it is not erroneous to dismiss the motion ; nor will this court reverse the action of the trial judge in refusing to accept as a sufficient excuse for not duly filing a brief of evidence the failure of the circuit stenographer, from' illness ‘or any other cause, to write out the evidence. Boatwright v. State, 91 Ga. 13 ; Eason v. Americus, 106 Ga. 179.
2. While a trial judge may, within the restrictions prescribed by the Civil Oodé, §5331," direct a verdict, this court will in no case overrule as erroneous a refusal to do so.
3. 'When a party against whom a verdict has been rendered, without moving for a new trial, sues out a direct bill of exceptions, he must, in order to obtain a reversal of the judgment, show not only that error was committed, but also that the adverse verdict was a necessary result thereof. There was at the trial of the present case no error, if any at all, of the nature above indicated. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 S.E. 967, 111 Ga. 889, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/western-atlantic-railroad-v-callaway-mccarty-gregory-ga-1900.