Case ID: ga_94/html/0224-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Lumpkin, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Starling v. The Western Union Telegraph Company.
    'The case having been very loosely managed by counsel for the plaintiff below as to pleading, and apparently also as to evidence, and it not appearing that a new trial may not further the ends of justice, the general rule applicable to the first grant of a new trial by the presiding judge should control.
    July 30, 1894.
    Action for penalty. Before Judge Henry. Chattooga superior court. September term, 1893.
    Ennis & Starling and G. A. H. Harris, for plaintiff.
    McHenry, Nunnally & Neel, for defendant.
   Lumpkin, Justice.

This was an action against the telegraph company for the statutory penalty. It resulted in a verdict for the •plaintiff below; the defendant moved for a new trial on /several grounds, and a new trial was granted by the presiding judge.

An examination of the record shows that the case for the plaintiff below was very loosely managed — certainly as to the pleading, and most probably as to the evidence. Another hearing may further the ends of justice. At .any rate, it does not appear that a new trial will not have this result. This is a case to which the general rrule relating to the first grant of a new trial is applicable, and accordingly, this court will not closely scrutinize the grounds of the motion, but will allow that rule to control. Judgment affirmed.