Legal Opinion
McConnell v. Selph
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided October 3, 1923No. 14589PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBlood worth, J.
1. Neither the first nor the second special ground of the motion for a new trial presents any question for determination by this court.
2. The judgment of the trial court refusing a new trial, on condition that a specified portion of a verdict, which part is unauthorized by the pleadings, be written off by the plaintiff, is not erroneous where the amount to be written off is readily and accurately ascertainable from the record. Tifton, Thomasville & Gulf Railway Co. v. Chastain, 122 Ga. 250 (7) (50 S. E. 105); Central Railway Co. v. Perkerson, 112 Ga. 923 (4) (38 S. E. 365, 53 L. R. A. 210).…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. PerkersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Seaboard Air-Line Railway v. BishopSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Steadman v. SimmonsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1869
- Tifton, Thomasville & Gulf Railway Co. v. ChastainSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Lee v. BagwellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Mock v. WrigleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1986
- Waynesboro Planing Mill v. HargroveCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925