Case ID: ga_94/html/0704-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Cheshire v. Tappan, administrator, et al.
    
    The charge as a whole was a fair and correct presentation to the jury of the issues involved, and covered fully the substance of the request preferred by counsel for the defendant, so far as the same was legal and pertinent. The verdict, after deducting therefrom the amount which the court ordered to be written off, was fully warranted by the evidence. Judgment affirmed.
    
    June 25, 1894.
    Action on account. Before Judge Marshall J. Clarke. Pulton superior court. March term, 1898.
    
      Alexander & Lambdin, for plaintiff in error.
    Rosser & Carter, contra.
    
   This was a suit on account for $281.20, with pleas of •set-off and payment. On conflicting evidence the jury found for the plaintiff, and the court denied a new trial on condition that $100 be written off', which was done.