19 S.E.2d 314 | Ga. Ct. App. | 1942
1. In the first appeal of this case this court construed the action to be upon an entire contract between a party and his attorney for services in two kinds of litigation, one kind of which was recoverable and the other not. Upon the second trial it was error to submit to the jury the question whether the plaintiff made a contract with his attorney different from and contradictory to the one alleged in the petition.
2. It was error to refuse to admit testimony tending to show the reasonable value of the kind of services this court has held to be recoverable under the petition. *84
3. There being no evidence of the reasonable value of the services this court has held are recoverable under the petition the verdict was without evidence to support it.
A party litigant is bound by the allegations in his pleadings which are not stricken by amendment and he can not offer evidence to contradict them. Armour v. Lunsford,
Judgment reversed. Stephens, P. J., and Sutton, J., concur.