Case ID: ga_116/html/0423-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Cóbb, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Walters v. Freeman.
    Argued October 7,
    Decided October 30, 1902.
    Action for damages. Before Judge Russell. Franklin superior court. March 28, 1902.
    
      J. N. Worley and 0. C. Brown, for plaintiff.
    
      J. H. Skelton, W. B. Little, and L. W. Meadow, for defendant.
   Cóbb, J.

While the case for plaintiff in error appeals more strongly to this court than that for the defendant in error, yet as a jury of the vicinage has seen proper to render a verdict for the defendant in error, in a case turning upon questions of fact, the judge who presided in the case has approved the verT diet, and the motion for a new trial is confined to the general grounds, this court, in accordance with the rule of non-interference in such cases, feels constrained to affirm the judgment overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Lumpkin, P. J., absent.'