Legal Opinion
Maryfield Plantation, Inc. v. Harris Gin Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided November 14, 1967No. 43220PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Eberhardt, Judge.
Was the direction of the verdict authorized? It is only when there is no conflict in the evidence, or when all of the evidence introduced, together with all reasonable deductions to be drawn therefrom, demands a particular verdict that the court is authorized to direct it. Code Ann. § 110-104; Stone v. Jernigan, 214 Ga. 249 (1) (104 SE2d 101). Unless the facts lawfully proven—all of them—viewed from every proper legal standpoint would sustain no other finding, the directed verdict was unauthorized. We find conflicts in the testimony of the witnesses offered by the parties.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ayers v. John B. Daniel Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
- Turner v. HardySupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
- Young v. LandersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Gaither v. GaitherSupreme Court of Georgia · 1856
- First National Bank v. City of SpartaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance v. RheeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
- Goss v. MathisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- Sabo v. FutchSupreme Court of Georgia · 1970
- Bishop Contracting Co. v. North Georgia Equipment Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1992
- Griffin v. BankstonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2009
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.