Case ID: ga_175/html/0461-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Rogers v. Rogers.
    No. 8920.
    August 15, 1932.
    
      H. A. Allen, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Eugene L. Tiller and Tull C. Waters, contra.
   Per Curiam.

The motion for a new trial in this case contains only the usual general grounds. After an examination of the evidence, the court is of the opinion that the verdict rendered by the jury was authorized • by the evidence, and the discretion of the court in refusing a new trial will not be disturbed. Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.