Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. O'Kelley

1. Under the facts of the ease the court did not err in refusing to give the requested instructions to the jury, as complained of in the first ground of the amendment to the motion for a new trial.

2. Grounds 2, 9, 14, and 19 respectively of the amendment to the motion for a new trial complain of the refusal of the court to exclude certain testimony. ,At least some of the testimony to which objection- was madp in each of these grounds was admissible. It was not error, therefore, to refuse to rule out all of the testimony objected to.

3. The admission of the testimony set out in grounds 4, 8, 11…