Southern Bank v. Goette
Cases that cite this one
38 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Dollar v. Dollar (Ga. 1958)
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Clements (Ga. Ct. App. 1955)
- Haley v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (Ga. Ct. App. 1973)
- Phoenix Insurance Co. v. Bentley (Ga. Ct. App. 1972)
- Fuels, Inc. v. Rutland (Ga. Ct. App. 1970)
- Poss v. Hughes (Ga. Ct. App. 1969)
- Bufford v. Bufford (Ga. 1967)
- Keplinger v. Cook (Ga. Ct. App. 1967)
- Lampkin v. Edwards (Ga. 1966)
- Rothberg v. Charles H. Hardin Construction Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1965)
- Taylor v. Wilson (Ga. Ct. App. 1964)
- Bedingfield v. McCullough (Ga. Ct. App. 1962)
- Thompson v. Gore (Ga. Ct. App. 1958)
- Consolidated Telephone Co. v. Kincaid (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)
- Ball v. Murray (Ga. Ct. App. 1956)
- Roanoke City Mills, Inc. v. Whelchel (5th Cir. 1954)
- Ray v. Marett (Ga. Ct. App. 1951)
- Clarke v. Woodward (Ga. Ct. App. 1947)
- Davis v. Akridge (Ga. 1945)
- Lane Drug Stores Inc. v. Brooks (Ga. Ct. App. 1944)
- Stepp v. Stepp (Ga. 1943)
- Standard Brick & Tile Co. v. Posey (Ga. Ct. App. 1937)
- Robertson v. Carroll Furniture Co. (Ga. Ct. App. 1936)
- Hansberger Motor Transportation Co. v. Pate (Ga. Ct. App. 1935)
- Lancaster v. Daniel (Ga. 1934)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
1. Relatively to the revising powers of this court, the jury are the exclusive judges of the credibility of witnesses. Rome Railroad Co.v. Barnett, 94 Ga. 446. Therefore this court will not reverse a judgment overruling a motion for a new trial, on the ground that the verdict was contrary to evidence, when the presiding judge in the exercise of his discretion has allowed the verdict to stand, and the same is supported by the evidence of any of the witnesses sworn on the trial, notwithstanding much of the evidence tended to impeach the credibility of such witnesses.
2. This rule is not inapplicable because the verdict complained of was rendered on the evidence of witnesses who were parties to the case. A person testifying in his own behalf is not entitled to a finding in his favor if that version of his testimony the most unfavorable to him shows that the verdict should be against him. Western & Atlantic Railroad Company v. Evans, 96 Ga. 481. Yet, if by his evidence he establishes a cause of action, or a defense, as the case may be, and from no view of his testimony would a finding against him be warranted, the jury may, in the exercise of their right to judge of the credibility of witnesses, accept his evidence, notwithstanding much of the evidence introduced on the trial tends to impeach him and show his want of credibility.
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.