Legal Opinion
Holcomb v. Kirby
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided January 11, 1968No. 43112, 43113PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Eberhardt, Judge.
Appellant enumerates as error the charging of both Subsections (a) and (b) of Code § 68-1650 (which he now contends are conflicting) “without giving an explanation as to how they should be resolved.” No exception was made to this part of the charge, or as to any failure of the court to charge an “explanation” thereof at any time before verdict, as is required by Code Ann. § 70-207 (a). Consequently, unless *270error appears that is “harmful as a matter of law” we are not authorized to consider this enumeration. For statements of when an error (if there was one) meets the test for…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Nathan v. DuncanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Georgia Power Co. v. MaddoxCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Hollywood Baptist Church of Rome v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Ware v. AlstonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Carnes v. StateCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State Highway Department v. HowardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Johnson v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Royal Frozen Foods Co. v. GarrettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Widener v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Johnson v. MyersCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.