Harbin v. Flannigan
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Action for damages; from Cherokee superior court—Judge J. B. Jones presiding. June 9, 1917. That part of the brief of counsel for the plaintiff in error to which the decision refers is as follows: “Counsel insists the various excerpts excepted to in the amended motion were prejudicial to plaintiff in error; and also insists the evidence of Miss Nina Axley should not have gone to the jury, as she did not qualify as an expert;”
1Opinion of the CourtBloodwobth, J.
1. Tlie reference in the brief of counsel for the' plaintiff in error to the grounds of the amendment to the motion for a new trial does not amount to an argument, and these grounds will be treated as abandoned. Mills v. State, 19 Ga. App. 623 (1), 624 (91 S. E. 918), and cases cited; Laffitte v. State, 105 Ga. 595 (1), 596 (31 S. E. 540); Moss v. Bohanon, 111 Ga. 871 (36 S. E. 954).
2. There Is evidence to support the verdict, which has the approval of the trial judge, and this court will not interfere.
Judgment affirmed.
Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Laffitte v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1898
- Mills v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
- Moss v. BohanonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
3Cited by2 opinions
- Southern Railway Co. v. WhiteheadCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- O'Neal v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1919