Legal Opinion

Nottingham v. Nicholson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 13, 1931No. 20617PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

1. “Verdicts are to have a reasonable intendment, and are to receive a reasonable construction, and are not to be avoided unless from necessity.” Civil Code (1910), § 5927. A verdict, though not explicit in its terms, the intent of which is apparent from the pleadings and the evidence, must be construed with reference thereto. Giles v. Spinks, 64 Ga. 205; Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247; Seifert v. Holt, 82 Ga. 757 (9 S. E. 843) ; Tifton &c. Ry. Co. v. Butler, 4 Ga. App. 191, 193 (60 S. E. 1087). In the instant case, which was a suit for an alleged balance of $1883.51 on an- account for sawing…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Tifton, Thomasville & Gulf Railway Co. v. ButlerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  2. Seifert v. HoltSupreme Court of Georgia · 1889
  3. Giles v. SpinksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1879
  4. Harvey v. HeadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
  5. Pollard v. KingSupreme Court of Georgia · 1878

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Carithers v. CarithersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
  2. Dunson v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
  3. Carlson v. HoltCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
  4. Field v. Liberty Mutual Ins.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1955

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

Powered by the Exa API