Legal Opinion

Powell v. Weeks

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 21, 1935No. 25004PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

1. “Wliere a case lias been tried by a jury and a verdict rendered therein, and the losing party desires to test the sufficiency of tile evidence to support the verdict, a motion for a new trial is indispensable. . . The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a verdict will not be considered by this court upon a direct bill of exceptions. The question must be made and passed upon in the court below, by a motion for new trial.” Hamilton National Bank v. Robertson, 177 Ga. 734 (171 S. E. 293), and cit.; Mackin v. Blalock, 133 Ga. 550 (4) 553 (66 S. E. 265, 134 Am. St. R. 220); Jones v.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Mackin v. BlalockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
  2. Hamilton National Bank v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
  3. Jones Bros. v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
  4. Jones v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
  5. Varner v. ThomsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Cheatham v. PalmerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  2. Grant v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962

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

Powered by the Exa API