Legal Opinion

Holmes v. Burkett

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 18, 1958No. 37340, 37356PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Judge.

The evidence, both oral and documentary, is quite extensive and voluminous in this case and for the purpose of passing on the usual general grounds of the motion for new trial we deem it neither necessary nor beneficial to set out or quote any portion of it. Suffice it to say that after a careful reading and a thorough consideration of the record the conclusion is mandatory that the evidence amply supports the verdict, and the trial court did not err in denying the motion for new trial as to the usual general grounds.

Special ground numbered 4 complains of the lulling admitting…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Clare v. DrexlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1921
  2. Limbert v. BishopCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
  3. The GREYHOUND CORPORATION v. CloughSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
  4. City of Commerce v. BradfordCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
  5. Hardy v. HardySupreme Court of Georgia · 1919

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Reid v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
  2. Steverson v. Hosp. Auth. of Ware CountyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
  3. Childers v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
  4. Georgia Power Co. v. HarwellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
  5. Myers v. PearceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960

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

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

Powered by the Exa API