Legal Opinion
McDonald v. Wimpy
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided February 11, 1948No. 16053PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Duckworth, Presiding Justice.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) The new trial here granted was the first grant of a new trial to the defendant, and comes within the rule that it will not be disturbed unless the evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the opposite party. Jordan v. Dooly, 129 Ga. 392 (58 S. E. 879); Mitchell v. West End Park Co., 177 Ga. 449 (170 S. E. 376). Before determining whether or not the evidence demanded a verdict in favor of the petitioner, however, it is necessary to examine the petitioner’s objections to the brief of the evidence presented by the defendant, for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lovelace v. LovelaceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Dollar v. Fred W. Amend Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1938
- Roberson v. RobersonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1945
- Murray v. DavidsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1932
- Jordan v. DoolySupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Corr v. CorrSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
- Hulsey v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- McDonald v. WimpySupreme Court of Georgia · 1949
- Whidby v. FeaginsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Davis v. HowellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1962