History
  • No items yet
midpage
Pollard v. State
54 S.E. 171
Ga.
1906
Check Treatment
Cobb, P. J.

1. “An amendment to a motion for a new trial, which has upon it an entry to the effect that it was ‘allowed’ by the judge, with nothing else to indicate an approval of its grounds, is not sufficiently verified to authorize this court to deal with the assignments of error therein.” Sterling v. Unity Cotton Mills, 119 Ga. 173, and cit.; Williams v. State, 120 Ga. 488, and cit.; Bradley v. State, 121 Ga. 162.

2. The verdict was authorized by the evidence, and no sufficient reason appears for reversing the judgment.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concitr.

Case Details

Case Name: Pollard v. State
Court Name: Supreme Court of Georgia
Date Published: May 11, 1906
Citation: 54 S.E. 171
Court Abbreviation: Ga.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.