Stynchcombe v. Gooding Amusement Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Bell, Presiding Judge.
Quite understandably, dedicated counsel on appeal repeatedly seek to invoke the provisions of Code § 105-2015 on behalf of their clients when in the lawyers’ partisan opinions the verdict as to their clients is either “excessive” or “inadequate.” The courts, however, are not devoted adherents to anyone’s cause. The rules of law governing “ex-cessiveness” and “inadequacy” of verdicts are well delineated in numerous decisions of our appellate courts. These principles must be applied consistently and equably to the facts of each case. The facts here are insufficient to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Brown v. Service Coach Lines Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
- Richmond & Danville Railroad v. MitchellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1893
- Holland v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
- Hatcher v. BrayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
- Atlanta Metallic Casket Co. v. HollingsworthCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Maloy v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Wilson v. DunawayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Kirkman v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
- Overnite Transportation Co. v. HartCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Moore v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967