Powell v. Weeks
Court of Appeals of Georgia
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
- Mackin v. BlalockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Hamilton National Bank v. RobertsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1933
- Jones Bros. v. RichardsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919
- Jones v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- Varner v. ThomsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cheatham v. PalmerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Grant v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962