Moore v. Ulm
Supreme Court of Georgia
This was an action of ej ectment by Henderson, the intestate of the plaintiff in error, against Ulm, the defendant in error.
Read the full summary
This was an action of ej ectment by Henderson, the intestate of the plaintiff in error, against Ulm, the defendant in error. It was tried before Judge Thomas, at October term, 1859, when the locus in quo and the posssession^ of defendant at the commencement of the suit being made out, the plaintiff showed a chain of title down to himself, beginning with a grant from the State to one John Jordan, dated in 1818. The defendant read in evidence a grant from the State to one William Graves, covering the same premises, and dated in 1789. He then sought to show, that by a judicial sale title passed…
1Opinion of the CourtLumpkin, C. J.
Concurring, as we do, with Judge Harris, as to the newly discovered evidence, we adopt his opinion as our own, upon that ground.
A grave question is presented by counsel for the plaintiff in error, in the argument of this case, viz, as to the right of amending the motion for a new trial. It is insisted that it cannot be so amended as to include matter that has arisen since the making of the original motion. Application may be made for a new trial in extraordma/ry cases, after the term at which the trial was had. Code, section 3648. So we infer that new grounds may he inserted, which originated…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1943
- Kirkland v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1915
- Matthews v. GraceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945
- Gibbs v. State.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1876