Case ID: ga-app_23/html/0741-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Luke, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

10246, 10247.
    Richie v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company; and vice versa.
    
    Decided May 16, 1919.
    Action for damages; from city court of Cartersville—Judge Aubrey. October 12, 1918.
    
      A. W. Fite, J. R. Whitaker, R. R. Arnold, for plaintiff.
    
      D. W. Blair, Neel, Finley & Neel, for defendant.
   Luke, J.

It appears to be conclusively settled that, notwithstanding the return of a second verdict in favor of the same party, the trial judge may still exercise his discretion in granting or refusing a new trial, though that discretion may not then be as ample as on the hearing of the motion for a first new trial (Morgan v. Lamb, 16 Ga. App. 484, and cases there cited, 85 S. E. 792) ; and under the particular, facts of the instant case the second grant of a new trial was not an abuse of the discretion vested in the trial judge.

Judgment affirmed on both bills of exceptions.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., conewr.