Legal Opinion

Smith v. Hilton & Dodge Lumber Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided November 25, 1913No. 5059PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Complaint; from city court of Dublin — J. E. Burch, judge pro hac vice. May 19, 1913.

1Opinion of the CourtRussell, C. J.

1. The assignment of error complaining of the ruling of the court upon the admissibility of documentary evidence can not be considered, because the papers which the defendant moved to exclude were not embodied in the ground of the motion for a new trial, nor attached thereto as an exhibit. City of Rome v. Harris, 12 Ga. App. 756 (78 S. E. 475).

2. The plaintiff sued upon an account. The defendant pleaded a set-off, but did not supply the jury .with any data which would have authorized a finding in his favor for timber delivered by him of a lower grade than that provided for by the contract,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. City of Rome v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Rinzler v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API