Legal Opinion
Maxwell v. Hollis
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided July 6, 1961No. 38910PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Carlisle, Presiding Judge.
1. Grounds of a motion for a new trial complaining of error in specified portions of the charge must point out expressly wherein such portions were error. Cardell v. State, 70 Ga. App. 45 (27 SE2d 250); Wynn v. State, 74 Ga. App. 231 (3) (39 SE2d 425); Haire v. State, 89 Ga. App. 629 (2) (80 SE2d 497).
2. A mere general assignment that a specified portion of the charge was error presents only the question of whether or not such charge stated an abstractly correct proposition of law. Central Ry. Co. v. Bond, 111 Ga. 13, 17 (8) (36 SE 299); Burden v. Gates, 190 Ga. 300…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Anderson v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. BondSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
- Mendel v. Converse & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Atlanta Life Insurance v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
- Parnelle v. CavanaughSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Carroll v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
- Maxwell v. HollisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962