Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Willingham
22 S.E. 937, 97 Ga. 338
Opinions
There was no error in refusing to give in charge to the jury the several requests presented by the defendant. There was sufficient evidence to warrant the verdict, and the trial judge having approved the same, this court will not overrule his discretion in .refusing to grant a new trial.
Judgment on piain Mil of exceptions affirmed.
Both Mils of exceptions filed by defendant in error dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Willingham, 22 S.E. 937, 97 Ga. 338 (Ga. 1895).
22 S.E. 937 (Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Willingham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ellis v. MAJOR GAS & OIL COMPANY, INC.
267 S.E.2d 485 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Bush v. Addison
151 S.E. 526 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
Neal v. Medlin
138 S.E. 254 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1927)
Mitchell v. Owen
127 S.E. 122 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1925)
Horne & Ponder v. O. B. & E. J. Evans
120 S.E. 787 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
LaGrange Grocery Co. v. Young & Griffin Coffee Co.
117 S.E. 673 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Manson
94 S.E. 1033 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)