Arnold v. Mitchell

Georgia Court of Appeals
Arnold v. Mitchell, 23 Ga. App. 658 (1919)
99 S.E. 135; 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 267
Bloodwobth

Arnold v. Mitchell

Opinion of the Court

Bloodwobth, J.

1. The grounds of the motion for a new trial that the court erred in allowing in evidence certain documentary evidence can not be considered, since the evidence referred to is not set forth either literally or in substance in' the motion or in an exhibit thereto. Walton v. Busby, 147 Ga. 487 (94 S. E. 562) ; Willbanks v. Byrd-Matthews Lumber Co., 146 Ga. 750 (3) (92 S. E. 281); Bank of Norwood v. Chapman, 19 Ga. App. 709 (3) (92 S. E. 225).

2. The evidence authorized the verdict, and the judgment is'

Affirmed.

Broyles, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Reference

Cited By
2 cases
Status
Published