Fugazzi, Lovelace & Co. v. Tomlinson
Fugazzi, Lovelace & Company v. Tomlinson
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Turner, J.
1. Until there has been in the triaL court a judgment finally dis- ' posing of a case, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain a complaint that error’was committed by the trial judge in striking, on demurrer, portions of the defendant’s answer. Turner v. Camp, 110 Ga. 631 ; Harvey v. Bowles, 112 Ga. 421 ; Berryman v. Haden, Id. 752; Ray v. Anderson, 117 Ga. 136 .
2. As has heretofore been repeatedly announced, the first grant of a new trial will not be disturbed by this court unless it affirmatively appears that the evidence demanded the verdict returned by the jury.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur, except Simmons, C. J., absent.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 23 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.