Georgia Court of Appeals, 1910

Parrott v. Tinley

Parrott v. Tinley
Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided May 12, 1910 · Hill
7 Ga. App. 711; 67 S.E. 1049; 1910 Ga. App. LEXIS 482

Parrott v. Tinley

Opinion of the Court

Hill, C. J.

1. The charge of the court, as a whole, submitted, the issues made by the pleadings and the evidence fairly, fully and accurately, and the objections made to excerpts therefrom are without merit. No error of law appears, and the question of negligence as settled by the verdict is supported by some evidence.

2. The jury believed that the plaintiff’s theory as to how he was injured was the truth, notwithstanding some of the testimony may have brought his theory into seemingly direct and inexplicable conflict with physical -laws. The duty of reconciling mysterious facts with physical laws, and solving perplexing problems is peculiarly for the jury, and this court will not interfere with the solution, unless manifestly a mistake or indisputably erroneous. King Mfg. Co. v. Walton, 1 Ga. App. 403 (6), 411 (58 S. E. 115); Central R. Co. v. Rouse, 77 Ga. 407 (3 S. E. 307). Judgment affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.