From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Daniels v. Hartley

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 9, 1969
170 S.E.2d 315 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)

Opinion

44760.

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 3, 1969.

DECIDED SEPTEMBER 9, 1969.

Action for damages. Crisp Superior Court. Before Judge McMurray.

C. B. King, for appellant.

Wright, Reddick Faircloth, George P. Wright, for appellees.


This appeal is from the judgment denying plaintiff's motion for new trial. The motion was based solely on the general grounds. Thus, the only query is whether the evidence supported the verdict. Southern R. Co. v. Adams, 14 Ga. App. 366 ( 80 S.E. 912); Brown v. Bank of Cumming, 144 Ga. 655 ( 87 S.E. 887). And see the host of annotations in Code § 70-202, catchwords "General Grounds," "Approval," etc. There is in the transcript evidence which if believed by the jury was quite sufficient to have authorized the verdict. It is, of course, of no moment that the evidence would also have authorized a verdict in some amount for the plaintiff. The jury weighed the evidence and made its choice. That was its duty and its function.

Judgment affirmed. Eberhardt and Deen, JJ., concur.

ARGUED SEPTEMBER 3, 1969 — DECIDED SEPTEMBER 9, 1969.


Summaries of

Daniels v. Hartley

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Sep 9, 1969
170 S.E.2d 315 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)
Case details for

Daniels v. Hartley

Case Details

Full title:DANIELS v. HARTLEY et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Sep 9, 1969

Citations

170 S.E.2d 315 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)
170 S.E.2d 315

Citing Cases

Venable v. State Hwy. Dept

8. There was conflicting evidence as to value, and this court cannot say the evidence was insufficient to…

Smiway, Inc. v. Dept. of Transp

Accordingly, we find no error as to the general grounds. See Daniels v. Hartley, 120 Ga. App. 294 ( 170…