Legal Opinion

Alley v. Candler

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided June 7, 1923No. 3563PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHines, J.

1. The grounds of a motion for new trial were, (1) that the verdict is contrary to evidence, and without evidence to support it, (2) that it is decidedly and'strongly against the weight of the evidence, and (3) that the verdict is contrary to law and the principles of justice and equity. In the bill of exceptions error is assigned upon the judgment of the court overruling the motion for new trial. Under such an assignment of error, this court is without jurisdiction to decide whether the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the propounder. Dickenson v. Stults, 120 Ga. 632 (48 S. E.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Dickenson v. StultsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  2. Heery v. BurkhalterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  3. First National Bank v. TaylorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1912
  4. Stone v. Hebard Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  5. Brandon & Co. v. AkersSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Jackson v. CrutchfieldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1937
  2. Smith v. WoodSupreme Court of Georgia · 1940
  3. Tyson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1927
  4. W. A. Lathem and Sons v. ReinhardtCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
  5. Thompson v. VanderbiltSupreme Court of Georgia · 1928

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API