State Highway Department v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Frankum, Judge.
“The right to open is important. It enables the party to give direction to the case, very often to choose the ground on which the battle shall be fought. And the right to conclude is more important still. Even in fair and legitimate argument, the party concluding has the advantage of knowing precisely the line of his opponent, and therefore of directing his attention to it, and arraying everything in the case, that fairly illustrates and sustains his view of it.” Buchanan v. McDonald, 40 Ga. 286, 288. The denial of the right to open and conclude the argument to the jury to the…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Georgia Power Co. v. BrooksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1950
- Atlantic & Birmingham Railroad v. PennySupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Spivey v. SpiveySupreme Court of Georgia · 1947
- Johnson v. Fulton CountyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Andrus v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lumpkin v. State Highway DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Canada Dry Bottling Co. v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Justice v. Georgia Power Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
- Adams v. Housing Authority of the City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Hodsdon v. WhitworthCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.