Case ID: ga-app_32/html/0403-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bloodwobth, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

15423.
    Rounsaville v. Lamb.
    Decided June 10, 1924.
    Action for damages; from Floyd superior court — Judge Wright. February 4, 1924.
    
      Maddox, Matthews & Owens, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Porter & Mehane, contra.
   Bloodwobth, J.

1. When the excerpts from the charge of which complaint is made in the motion for a new trial are considered in connection with the remainder of the charge, there is no error in any of them that requires the grant of a new trial.

2. There is some evidence to support the finding of the jnry; no error of law appears to have been committed upon the trial of the case; and the verdict having been approved by the trial judge, this court is without authority to interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and Lulce, J., concur.