23 Ga. 222 | Ga. | 1857
By the Court —
delivering the opinion.
Were any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial, good?
We think not. There is manifestly nothing in the first? second, and third grounds.
The testimony of Jones, referred to in the fourth ground, was “relevant.”
The damages may be heavy; but there is not enough disclosed to this Court, to satisfy it, that they are excessive. The boundaries for the amount of damages in cases of this kind, are any thing but fixed.
There is then, nothing visible to this Court, in the fifth ground.
The jury separated for their supper; but they did so, on their own request; they did so, by leave of the Court, and. under a charge, to “ have no intercourse or conversation, on the subject of the “suit,” and not to be present hearing the conversation of others on the subject”
The counsel for the defendant in the action, were present when the leave to separate, was given, and made no objection to its being given.
These are all the grounds.
We affirm the judgment of the Court below.
Judgment affirmed.