Ford Motor Company v. Hanley
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Stolz, Judge.
Appellant Ford Motor Company (Ford) cross appeals from certain rulings of the trial judge during the trial, referred to in Hanley v. Ford Motor Co., 128 Ga. App. 307.
Enumerated errors 1 and 2 complain of the trial judge’s failure to order the instant and immediate production of a statement taken from the young lady passenger in defendant Pritchett’s automobile at the time of the accident and who was a witness in the case for defendant Pritchett.
A brief chronology will assist in reaching a full appreciation of the situation that confronts us. The accident in question occurred on…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hickman v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. DaughertyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Holmes v. HardenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
- Hays v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
- Williams v. YoungCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Ford Motor Co. v. StubblefieldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- Adsitt v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1981
- Woods v. AndersenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
- Birge v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
- Hogan v. OliveraCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.