Meinhard, Schaul & Co. v. Bedingfield Mercantile Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Complaint, from city court of Dublin — Judge Burch. October 28, 1907.
1Opinion of the CourtRussell, J.
Meinhard, Schaul & Company (the plaintiffs in error) brought a suit against the defendants in error, on an account for goods furnished. The action was brought against the defendants as a partnership, composed of H. B. Bedingñeld, A. B. Daniel, and M. L. Clance. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs; and, upon motion for new trial, the judge set aside the verdict and granted a new trial.
1. The discretion of the trial judge, in the first grant of a new trial will not be interfered with, so far as the evidence is concerned, unless the verdict rendered was demanded by the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Wilcox v. JacksonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1884
- Barnett Line of Steamers v. Blackmar & ChandlerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1874
- Slade & Etheridge v. PaschalSupreme Court of Georgia · 1881
- Rau v. Union Paper Mill Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Brugman v. McGuireSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1878
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Chambliss v. HallCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Hagan v. Asa G. Candler Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1939
- Pope v. Triangle Chemical Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
- R. A. C. Realty Co. v. W. O. U. F. Atlanta Realty Corp.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- McRee v. Quitman Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1915
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.