Wheeler v. Salinger
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) After verdict for the plaintiff for principal, interest, and attorney’s fees as sued for, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial, which was overruled, and he excepted. The facts, in addition to those contained in the statement above, are sufficiently indicated in the headnotes. It is not deemed necessary to elaborate any of the rulings therein made.
Judgment affirmed on the main bill of exceptions; cross-bill dismissed.
Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.
2Cited by21 opinions
- Russell v. BayneCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Laney v. BarrCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
- Focus Healthcare Medical Center, Inc. v. O’nealCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2002
- Johnson v. DanielCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1975
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.