Legal Opinion
Ball v. State Highway Department
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided October 9, 1963No. 40297PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Bell, Presiding Judge.
On the general grounds of condemnee’s amended motion for new trial the appellate court will not disturb the trial court’s refusal to grant a new trial if there is any evidence at all to support the verdict, however slight, and regardless of what may be the character of the witnesses. Davis v. State, 68 Ga. App. 296 (22 SE2d 762); Aycock v. State, 62 Ga. App. 812 (10 SE2d 84). The appellate court is confined to reversing only where there is no evidence to support the verdict. Lanier v. Tullis, 73 Ga. 142; Adler v. Adler, 207 Ga. 394, 405 (7) (61 SE2d 824).
Under the rule…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Adler v. AdlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1950
- Aycock v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940
- State Highway Department v. AndrusSupreme Court of Georgia · 1956
- Turner v. BarberSupreme Court of Georgia · 1908
- Leathers v. LeathersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Dendy v. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Klumok v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Bill Ledford Motors, Inc. v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1997
- State Highway Department v. RosenfeldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Strickland v. Department of TransportationCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1990
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.