Legal Opinion

Kimbrel v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 27, 1920No. 10996PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Accusation of drawing check, without funds to meet it; from city court of Miller county—Judge Geer. October 1,1919.

1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.

1. “In order for the exclusion of oral testimony to be considered as a ground for a new trial, it must appear that a pertinent question was asked, and that the court ruled out the answer; and that a statement was made to the court at the time, showing what the answer would be; and that such testimony was material, and would have benefited the complaining party.” Griffin v. Henderson, 117 Ga. 382 (2) (43 S. E. 712). “The amendment to the motion for a new trial complains solely of 'the exclusion of certain evidence, but it is not shown therein that this evidence was offered by the plaintiff in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Griffin v. HendersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Lowe v. BurdenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1918

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Trammell v. ShirleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
  2. Tanner v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1958
  3. Sumner v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  4. Terry Shipbuilding Corp. v. GregoryCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  5. Jordan v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API