Case Name: Bell v. Foss et al.
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1907-06-26
Citations: 2 Ga. App. 207
Docket Number: 355
Parties: Bell v. Foss et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 207–207

Head Matter:
355.
Bell v. Foss et al.
Complaint, from city court of Quitman- — - Judge Bennet. September 3, 1906.
Submitted May 14,
Decided June 26, 1907.
The suit was by G-. W. Bell against Foss Bros., a firm composed of C. C. Foss and R. J. Foss, and against J. L. Massey, on a promissory note made by the defendants and payable to the plaintiff. The ■only defense filed was by C. C. Foss. lie denied that he signed or delivered the note, or authorized any one to do so for him, and alleged that at the time it was made he was in the ginnery business with his brother, R. J. Foss, but that it was not made in the transaction of their partnership business or in any way connected therewith, and that R. J. Foss was not authorized to sign the partnership name to it. There was conflict in the evidence as to the consideration of the note; the evidence for the plaintiff being that the note was given to him for borrowed money to pay the debts of Foss Bros., and the evidence of C. C. Foss being that the money was borrowed by R. J. Foss for the individual use of R. J. Foss in the purchase of a mule. A verdict was rendered against all the -defendants, and C. C. Foss filed a motion for a new trial on the .statutory grounds, which was granted by the trial judge.
Stanley S. Bennet, Sam. S. Bennet, for plaintiff.
L. W. Branch, for defendant.

Opinion:
Hill, C. J.
This being the first grant of a new trial, and it not affirmatively appearing that the verdict as rendered was demanded by the law and the evidence, this court, following the repeated rulings of the Supreme Court, will not interfere with the discretion of the trial judge. Civil Code, §5585. Judgment affirmed.