Shockley v. Turnell

The question presented for our consideration is whether or not the trial judge erred in dismissing a motion for a new trial. We gather the following facts from the record: The case of Turnell & Bearden, plaintiffs in attachment, against Walter E. Shockley, defendant in attachment, and Hattie L. Shockley, claimant, was, at the March term, 1900, of Morgan superior court, *379tried before a jury, and a verdict was rendered finding the property subject. During that term of the court the claimant made a motion for a new trial, the grounds of which were duly approved, and an order in the following…