Federal Reserve Bank v. Haynie
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.
T. “A fact can not be established by circumstantial evidence which is perfectly consistent with direct, uncontradicted, reasonable, and unimpeaehed testimony that the fact does not exist.” Neill v. Hill, 32 Ga. App. 381 (2b) (123 S. E. 30) ; Frazier v. Ga. R. &c. Co., 108 Ga. 807 (33 S. E. 996). As stated by Mr. Justice Van Devanter in United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Des Moines National Bank, 145 Fed. 273, “If the facts are consistent with either of two opposing theories, they prove neither.” As was also stated in Smith v. First National Bank, 99 Mass. 605 (97 Am. D. 59), “when the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Smith v. First National BankMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- Frazier v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Neill v. HillCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Des Moines Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
- Taylor v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Ladson Motor Company v. CroftSupreme Court of Georgia · 1956
- American Mutual Liability Co. v. HardenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
- King v. SharpeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
- Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp. v. BatesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Ussery v. KochCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.