Legal Opinion
Roddenberry Hardware Co. v. Merritt
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided January 6, 1916No. 6314PublishedCited by 21 opinions
Attachment; from city court of Cairo — Judge Singletary. December 24, 1914.
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, J.
1. The first, second, and third grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial, failing to set out literally or in substance the particular evidence, the admission of which is assigned as error, present no question for decision. Shaw v. Jones, 133 Ga. 446 (9), 450 (66 S. E. 240); Davis v. Gaskins, 137 Ga. 450 (2), 451 (73 S. E. 579).
2. The fourth ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial can not be considered, as the contract (the admission of a carbon copy of which is assigned as error) is not set forth, either literally or in substance, in that ground. Stewart v.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Shaw v. Jones, Newton & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Stewart Bros. v. Randall Bros.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Davis v. GaskinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
3Cited by21 opinions
- Tallent v. McKelveyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
- Powers v. PateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
- Franklin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1922
- Craig v. Augusta Roofing & Metal Works Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
- Lokey v. MalcomCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.