Woodall v. Swift & Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Woodall v. Swift & Co.

115 S.E. 39, 29 Ga. App. 261, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 220

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 12, 1922

Docket13757

StatusPublished

This text of 115 S.E. 39 (Woodall v. Swift & 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.

Bluebook

Woodall v. Swift & Co., 115 S.E. 39, 29 Ga. App. 261, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 220 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. There was no conflict in the evidence, and it demanded a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. It was therefore not error for the court to direct such a verdict.

2. The ground of the motion for a new trial which complains of the exclusion of evidence is without merit. It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

1. There was no conflict in the evidence, and it demanded a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. It was therefore not error for the court to direct such a verdict.

2. The ground of the motion for a new trial which complains of the exclusion of evidence is without merit. It was not error to overrule the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

115 S.E. 39, 29 Ga. App. 261, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodall-v-swift-co-gactapp-1922.