Legal Opinion
Bank of Emanuel v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided August 13, 1924No. 15436PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
1. Where it does not appear that a party has held back evidence within his power to produce, the nonproduction of more full and definite evidence than he presents raises no presumption against him, ■ and there should be no charge given to the jury on the subject of such presumption. Schnell v. Toomer, 56 Ga. 168 (4); Shields v. Georgia Railway &c. Co., 1 Ga. App. 172 (2), 176 (57 S. E. 980); Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Bernstein, 113 Ga. 175 (5) (38 S. E. 394).
2. Neither can a presumption arise prejudicial to a party for his failure to introduce a witness, if the jury may be satisfied from .the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Weinkle & Sons v. Brunswick & Western RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1899
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. BernsteinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Brothers v. HorneSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
- Schnell v. ToomerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1876
- Shields v. Georgia Railway & Electric Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Maloy v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Cotton States Fertilizer Co. v. ChildsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1934
- Floyd v. Colonial Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- Krupsaw v. W. T. Cowan, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1948
- Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. ChildsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.