Legal Opinion

Copeland v. Curtis

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 20, 1926No. 17429PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.

1. This case is controlled adversely to the defendant, in whose favor a nonsuit was granted, by the ruling made by this court in McPherson v. Capuano, 31 Ga. App. 82 (121 S. E. 580). The proof in the instant case, going to show the deleterious character of the articles of food furnished to the plaintiff, consists not only of expert testimony somewhat similar to that offered in the McPherson case, but in the instant case there is additional testimony, going to show that similar food was- furnished to a person other than the plaintiff at the same time, and that both the other person and the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. DannemanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1920
  2. Fleetwood v. Swift & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  3. McPherson v. Capuano & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1923

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Donaldson v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1938
  2. Armour & Co. v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929
  3. Armour Company v. GulleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
  4. Criswell Baking Co. v. MilliganCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
  5. Burns v. Ralston Purina CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1953

3 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