Legal Opinion
Wardlaw v. Wardlaw
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided June 10, 1930No. 20426PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBloodworth, J.
Special ground 1 of the motion for a new trial complains that the court erred in failure to charge § 3657 of the Civil Code of 1910; ground 2 of the failure to charge § 4040; and ground 9 of the failure to charge § 4044. In failing to charge these sections tlie court committed no error, as neither of them is adapted to the facts of the case. See, in this connection, Brazil v. City of LaGrange, 37 Ga. App. 500 (140 S. E. 784).
Special ground 3 of the motion alleges that the court erred in charging as follows: “They say further that although the deceased and Mrs. Lula Wardlaw were occupying the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hoxie v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Johnson v. TruittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- White v. KnappCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923
- Southern Railway Co. v. MerrittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
- Matthews & Co. v. Seaboard Air-Line RailwayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1916
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Trammell v. Atlanta Coach Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- Chance v. ChanceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
- Cox v. NixCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
- Brumbelow v. BrumbelowCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1965
- Holland v. FroklisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.