Hamilton National Bank v. Robertson
Supreme Court of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
1. “Where a case has been tried by a jury and a verdict rendered therein, and the losing party desires to test the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict, a motion for a new trial is indispensable.” Mackin v. Blalock, 133 Ga. 550 (4) (66 S. E. 265, 134 Am. St. R. 220). *735“The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a verdict will not be considered by this court upon a direct bill of exceptions. The question must be made and passed upon in the court below, by a motion for new trial.” Bacon v. Jones, 117 Ga. 497 (2) (43 S. E. 689). See also Mobley v. Ellis, 37 Ga. App. 683 (141 S. E.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Gilliard v. Johnston & MillerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Beall v. Mineral Tone Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1929
- Mackin v. BlalockSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Hightower v. HightowerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Mobley v. EllisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1928
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Cheatham v. PalmerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1941
- Mullis v. McCookSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
- Fleming v. CollinsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
- Hodges v. Seaboard Loan & Savings Ass'nSupreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Corr v. CorrSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.