Legal Opinion

Strickland v. Padgett

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided May 4, 1944No. 14821PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Duckaworth, Justice.

The motion to set aside the verdict is based on the ground that it is too vague, uncertain, and indefinite to be capable of execution, for the reason that each count set up a different diAdding line, and the verdict failed to state on which count it AAras found. The same reason is assigned in special ground 15 of the motion for neAV trial, excepting to the charge of the court that, if the jury found for the petitioner, their verdict would be, '“We, the jury, find in favor of the plaintiff, and that the defendant be enjoined;” and in special ground 16 of the motion for new…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Griffin v. RussellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  2. Lowry v. LowrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1930
  3. Jones v. TeasleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
  4. Shingler v. BaileySupreme Court of Georgia · 1911
  5. Hardwick v. HookSupreme Court of Georgia · 1850

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Nail v. NailSupreme Court of Georgia · 1956
  2. Patent Scaffolding Co. v. ByersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
  3. Strickland v. PadgettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1951

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

Powered by the Exa API