Legal Opinion

Arnold v. Mitchell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 22, 1919No. 10095PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Trover; from city court of Zebulon—Judge Dupree. August 31, 1918.

1Opinion of the CourtBloodwobth, J.

1. The grounds of the motion for a new trial that the court erred in allowing in evidence certain documentary evidence can not be considered, since the evidence referred to is not set forth either literally or in substance in' the motion or in an exhibit thereto. Walton v. Busby, 147 Ga. 487 (94 S. E. 562) ; Willbanks v. Byrd-Matthews Lumber Co., 146 Ga. 750 (3) (92 S. E. 281); Bank of Norwood v. Chapman, 19 Ga. App. 709 (3) (92 S. E. 225).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the judgment is'

Affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bank of Norwood v. ChapmanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1917
  2. Walton v. BusbySupreme Court of Georgia · 1917
  3. Willbanks v. Byrd-Matthews Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1917

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Delpheon Co. v. CrankshawCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
  2. Revis v. Bank of LaGrangeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921