Williams v. Davis

91 S.E. 283, 19 Ga. App. 263, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 89
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 1, 1917
Docket8181
StatusPublished

This text of 91 S.E. 283 (Williams v. Davis) 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.

Bluebook
Williams v. Davis, 91 S.E. 283, 19 Ga. App. 263, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 89 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Broyles, P. J.

1. The verdict was authorized by the evidence.

2. The grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial, not being referred to in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, are treated as abandoned.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
91 S.E. 283, 19 Ga. App. 263, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 89, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-davis-gactapp-1917.