Legal Opinion
Hamby v. Hamby
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided May 16, 1961No. 38770PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Bell, Judge.
We first consider whether the trial judge properly overruled the motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. It is necessary, as a condition precedent to a valid motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, that a legal *828motion for a directed verdict be made at the time when the party making it had the right to have a directed verdict. Durden v. Henderson, 212 Ga. 807 (1) (96 S. E. 2d 362). Here, as the law was at the time of the trial of this case, since the defendant did not offer any evidence, the motion for a directed verdict was not properly made. Thus, there was no…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Bordonaro v. SenkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Universal Concrete Pipe Co. v. BassettOhio Supreme Court · 1936
- Atlanta Street Railroad v. WalkerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Morrow v. Hume, Admx.Ohio Supreme Court · 1936
- Lee v. LottCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Lissmore v. KincadeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- Thomason v. WillinghamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Swafford v. Globe American Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- Hamby v. HambyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
- Guyer v. MAYOR &C. CITY OF SAVANNAHCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982