Case ID: ga-app_24/html/0207-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Bloodwobth, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

10313.
    Hutchins v. Watkins et al.
    
    Decided October 9, 1919.
    Complaint; from Crisp superior court—E. F. Strozier, judge pro hac vice. December 5, 1918.
    
      J. T. Hill, for plaintiff in error. Crum & Jones, contra.
   Bloodwobth, J.

“The motion for new trial in this case contained the usual general grounds only, and there being evidence to sustain the verdict, this court cannot disturb the finding of the jury by overruling the refusal of the trial judge to grant a new trial upon the ground that the verdict was contrary to evidence or without evidence to support it. Davis v. Kirkland, 1 Ga. App. 5 (58 S. E. 209); Stricklin v. Crawley, 1 Ga. App. 139 (58 S. E. 215); Charles v. Brooker, 1 Ga. App. 219 (58 S. E. 218); Daughtry v. Savannah & Ry. Co., 1 Ga. App. 393 (58 S. E. 230); Edge v. Thomas, 9 Ga. App. 559 (71 S. E. 875).” McCarty v. Keys, 19 Ga. App. 494 (91 S. E. 875); Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App. 510 (94 S. E. 618), and cases cited.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.