Legal Opinion

Spivey v. Barwick

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided April 16, 1924No. 3856PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Russell, O. J.

1. The plaintiff introduced a large number of witnesses, and closed; two witnesses (not including the defendant himself) had testified in behalf of the defendant, but a number of witnesses for the defendant were present to testify, and the defendant had not closed his testimony in support of his answer, when the court of its own motion directed a verdict contrary and adverse to some of the contentions pleaded by the defendant. This was error. Even if the evidence already adduced up to the time that the verdict was directed demanded the finding, the direction of a verdict before…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Thompson v. TennysonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1919
  2. McWilliams v. City of RomeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Star Manufacturing, Inc. v. EdenfieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1989
  2. Jones v. DarlingCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
  3. Nobles v. WebbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
  4. Vickers v. JonesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
  5. Gray v. RaperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967

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

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

Powered by the Exa API