Legal Opinion

Sulter v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 2, 1918No. 9465PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Accusation of misdemeanor; from city court of Savannah— Judge Rourke. November 17, 1917.

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, P. J.

1. The grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial, not being specifically argued in the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error, are deemed abandoned. The general statement in the brief, that “the recitals of fact and statement of error in the motion and amended motion for a new trial clearly state the issues in the case and the same is respectfully submitted to the court,” is not sufficient to change the rule. Youmans v. Moore, 11 Ga. App. 66 (74 S. E. 710); Muse v. Hall, 18 Ga. App. 651 (90 S. E. 222); James v. Boyett, 19 Ga. App. 157 (91 S. E. 219).

2.' The verdict was amply…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Youmans v. MooreCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912
  2. Muse v. HallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
  3. Jambs v. BoyettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. O'Neal v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919

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

Powered by the Exa API