Legal Opinion
Brooks v. Brooks
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided August 10, 1932No. 8807PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAtkinson, J.
1. "When a ease has been withdrawn or dismissed, without a finding by the jury on the facts on which the defense rests, and the court below allows it to be reinstated, this court will not interfere with that discretion.” Vanzant v. Arnold, 31 Ga. 210; See also Harrison v. Tate, 100 Ga. 317 (27 S. E. 179); Bird v. Burgsteiner, 113 Ga. 1012 (39 S. E. 425); City of Atlanta v. Miller, 125 Ga. 495 (54 S. E. 538); Southern Railway Co. v. James, 114 Ga. 198 (39 S. E. 849); Glenn v. Glenn, 152 Ga. 793 (111 S. E. 378); Miraglia v. Bryson, 152 Ga. 828 (3 a) (111 S. E. 655).
2. The judge did not err in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Miraglia v. BrysonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Vanzant, Jones & Co. v. Arnold, Hamilton & JohnsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1860
- Glenn v. GlennSupreme Court of Georgia · 1922
- Southern Railway Co. v. JamesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- City of Atlanta v. MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Durden v. DurdenSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Bowman v. BowmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
- Kinney v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966