Legal Opinion
Battle v. Yancey Bros.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided January 29, 1981No. 61388PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Deen, Presiding Judge.
1. (a) It has been well settled that a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict under Fed. Rules Civ. Proc., Rule 50 (b), 28 U. S. C. A. or the identical Georgia Code § 81A-150 (b) may be considered only when based upon a motion for directed verdict timely made, that is, at the close of all the evidence. Indamer Corp. v. Crandon, 217 F2d 391; Ga. S. & F. R. Co. v. Blanchard, 121 Ga. App. 82 (4) (173 SE2d 103) (1970); Ace Parts & Distributors v. First Nat. Bank, 146 Ga. App. 4 (4) (245 SE2d 314) (1978). In the present case a motion for directed verdict was made by…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ace Parts & Distributors, Inc. v. First National BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978
- Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. BlanchardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- GEMC Federal Credit Union v. ShoemakeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Motor Contract Co. v. SawyerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1971
- Georgia Grain & Stillage Co. v. First Georgia BankCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977
3Cited by7 opinions
- Glenridge Unit Owners Assn. v. FeltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
- Wehunt v. ITT Business Communications Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
- Marett v. Professional Insurance Careers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1991
- Tanner v. GillelandCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1988
- Buffington v. HaldiCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.