Legal Opinion

Stanley v. Chitwood

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided October 17, 1952No. 34192, 34193PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWorrill, J.

1. Special grounds of a motion for new trial must be complete and understandable within themselves without the necessity of reference to other special grounds of the motion, the brief of the evidence, or other parts of the record to understand them. This general principle is so well established as to need no citation of authority. See, however, the numerous cases cited under the catchword “Completeness” in Code (Ann.), § 70-301, and particularly Tarver v. Deppen, 132 Ga. 798 (3, 4) (65 S. E. 177); Price v. State, 170 Ga. 294 (3) (152 S. E. 572); Perdue & Pace v. Hurst, 24 Ga. App. 239 (1)…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Tarver v. DeppenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  2. Bray v. C. I. T. Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
  3. Price v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
  4. Sloan v. GlazeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1945
  5. James v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Guthrie v. LukeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958
  2. Guthrie v. LukeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API