Williams v. Hart

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Williams v. Hart

100 S.E. 786, 24 Ga. App. 371, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 674

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 6, 1919

Docket10366

StatusPublished

This text of 100 S.E. 786 (Williams v. Hart) 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. Hart, 100 S.E. 786, 24 Ga. App. 371, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 674 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The defendant having admitted in his plea the execution of the note sued on, it was not error to admit the note in evidence without requiring the plaintiff and holder of the note to prove its execution.

[372]*372Decided November 6, 1919.

Complaint; from city court of Nashville—Judge Lovett. December 31, 1918.

R. A. Hendricks, for plaintiffs in error. J. A. Alexander, contra.

2. There is no merit in the assignments of error upon the rejection of evidence, since 'the brief of the evidence shows that subsequently to the rulings complained of such testimony was admitted.

3. The plaintiff had legal title to the note sued upon; the evidence authorized the vei'dict, which has the approval of the trial judge; and no error of law is complained of which requires a now trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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