33 Ga. App. 612 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1925
1. “A ground of a motion for a new trial, complaining of the court’s ruling upon the admissibility of specified testimony, which does not state the name of the witness whose testimony was admitted or excluded, is too incomplete to be considered. Hunter v. State, 148 Ga. 566 (1) (97 S. E. 523); Adams v. State, 22 Ga. App. 252 (1) (95 S. E. 877), and citations.” Palmer v. State, 28 Ga. App. 567 (112 S. E. 154). Under this ruling special grounds 1, 2, and 3 of the motion for a new trial will not be considered.
2. Ground 4 of the motion for a new trial alleges that the court erred
3. Under the facts of this case there is no merit in grounds 5 and 6 of the motion for a new trial.
4. There is some evidence to support the verdict.
Judgment affirmed.