Case ID: ga-app_27/html/0489-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Hill, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

12553.
    MUSE v. JONES.
    The sole question in the case being one of fact, upon which the evidence is in conflict, the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial is affirmed.
    Decided October 7, 1921.
    Complaint; from Carroll superior court — Judge Irwin. April 28, 1921.
    
      Emmett Smith, for plaintiff in error. Boykin & Boykin, contra.
   Hill, J.

This was a suit for commissions alleged to be due on the sale of an automobile. The suit was filed in a justice’s court, where a verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and an appeal was taken to the superior court, where a verdict was again rendered for the plaintiff. The evidence was conflicting and the sole question is a question of fact. There was sufficient evidence to authorize the verdict, and this verdict has the approval of the trial judge.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.