Legal Opinion
Owens v. Shugart
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided November 30, 1939No. 27721PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.
1. “The-right of either party to a suit to subject to a thorough and sifting cross-examination the witnesses called to testify against him, is distinctly declared in section 3864 of the Code [§ 38-1705]. It is a substantial right, the preservation of which is essential to a proper administration of justice, and extends to all matters within the knowledge of the witness, the disclosure of which is material to the controversy.” News Publishing Co. v. Butler, 95 Ga. 559 (22 S. E. 282); Burch v. Wade, 58 Ga. App. 385 (198 S. E. 563). Especially is this true “where the witness is the opposite…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. HollandSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
- Blalock v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
- Glasco v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Augusta Naval Stores Co. v. ForlawSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Burch v. WadeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
3Cited by7 opinions
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. BurnettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
- Royal Crown Bottling Co. v. StilesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
- Hart v. Owens-Illinois, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
- Smith v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1947
- Ray v. Gallant-Belk Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.