Georgia Court of Appeals, 1919

Hargett v. State

Hargett v. State
Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided November 4, 1919 · Bloodworth
24 Ga. App. 357; 100 S.E. 765; 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 655

Hargett v. State

Opinion of the Court

Bloodworth, J.

1. The special ground of the motion for a new trial points out no error which would require the grant of a new trial.

2. This court is a court for the correction of errors of law alone. β€œIt has no authority to entertain an assignment of error that the verdict is contrary to the evidence, if there is any evidence at all to support the verdict. This ground in the motion for new trial is addressed to the discretion of the trial judge, upon whom is imposed the duty of being satisfied with a verdict before he approves it.” Bell v. Aiken, 1 Ga. App. 36 (57 S. E. 1001). On questions of fact the jury is the final arbiter. The trial judge by overruling the motion for a new trial expressed his satisfaction with the verdict, and this court will not interfere.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Luke, J., concur.

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