Legal Opinion

Hieber v. Buchanan

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided September 9, 1947No. 15929Published

1Opinion of the Court

Head, Justice.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) In the bill of exceptions error is assigned on the refusal of the court to permit a witness to answer certain questions on direct examination. “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 (43 S. E.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Griffin v. HendersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1903
  2. Page v. BrownSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
  3. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  4. Barron v. BarronSupreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  5. Andrews v. SimsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API