Gainesville Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Stewart
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
The general grounds of the defendant’s motion for a new trial are not argued or insisted upon. Where the amount of a verdict is attacked merely for excessiveness, and not for the inclusion of some calculable amount definitely ascertainable from the undisputed evidence, and the verdict has been approved by the trial court, it will not be set aside unless the amount is so excessive as to manifest undue bias or prejudice, gross mistake, or improper motive, on the part of the jury. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Lovett, 50 Ga. App. 763 (179 S. E. 253). It can not be said that the verdict for $2000…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Chenall v. Palmer Brick Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1903
- Palmer Brick Co. v. ChenallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. DannemanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
- Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. LovettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Stanfield ex rel. Stanfield v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1936
- Steinmetz v. ChambleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Dillon v. SillsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Cowart v. GunnCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Quinn v. Swift & Co.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1937
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.