Kell v. Hunter
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtWorrill, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) It is well settled that this court has no authority, on the general grounds, to disturb a verdict supported by some evidence and approved by the trial judge, even if there is conflicting evidence from which the jury would have been authorized to return a contrary verdict. Here, there is ample evidence to support the verdict of the jury and it has the approval of the trial judge.
In the second ground of the amended motion for a new trial the defendant assigns error on the admission of the following testimony of the plaintiff: “I told him that by letting out…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Southeastern Greyhound Lines Inc. v. HancockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
- Atlantic Greyhound Corp. v. AustinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
- New York Life Insurance Co. v. IttnerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. McCamyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
- Jackson v. Moultrie Production Credit Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Savino Dagnello v. Long Island Rail Road CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1961
- Srochi v. KamenskyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- Gaskin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Farmer v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
- Mitchell & Pickering v. Louis Isaacson, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.