Case ID: ga_112/html/0120-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lumpkin, P. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WARD v. LONG.
    The verdict was amply supported "by testimony, and there was no error at the trial; nor is any new question of law presented for decision by the Supreme Court.
    Argued October 8,
    Decided October 30, 1900.
    Levy and claim. Before Judge Harris. Carroll superior court. April term, 1900.
    
      Reese & Gordons, for plaintiff in error. S. Holderness, contra.
   Lumpkin, P. J.

Assuming, as we must, that the jury’s finding was right, this case is a type of a familiar class. The verdict establishes the fact that a fraud in which Mrs. Ward participated, and having for its object the placing of property justly and lawfully subject to Long’s attachment beyond the reach thereof, was perpetrated. There was no originality either in the conception or execution of the fraudulent scheme. A careful examination of the motion for a new trial does not disclose the commission of any error by the trial judge, nor is any new legal question presented. The well-settled principles of law were followed in the charge given to the jury, and the correct rules of evidence were applied. Let the verdict stand as a proper expression of the truth and justice of the case.

Judgment affirmed.

All concurring, except Little, J., absent.