Legal Opinion
Rutland v. Jordan
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided January 28, 1965No. 41091PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Nichols, Presiding Judge.
In support of the general grounds of the defendant’s motion for new trial it is contended that the amount of the verdict was not authorized. “The jury, having viewed the premises by consent of the parties, were in a better position to form an opinion as to the damages alleged than is this court from the reported evidence alone. City of Atlanta v. Milam, 95 Ga. 135, 137 (22 SE 43).” Rogers v. Western & Atlantic Railroad, 209 Ga. 450 (4) (74 SE2d 87). The verdict for the plaintiff was otherwise authorized by the evidence and the trial court did not err in overruling the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- City of Atlanta v. MilamSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- American Fire & Casualty Company v. GrizzleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
- Awbrey v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
- Pryor v. CogginSupreme Court of Georgia · 1855
- Rogers v. Western & Atlantic RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1953
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bone Construction Co. v. LewisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
- Medoc Corp. v. KeelCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
- Gay v. City of RomeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
- OGLETHORPE REALTY COMPANY, INC. v. HazzardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- Southern Mutual Investment Corp. v. LangstonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.