History
  • No items yet
midpage
Rentz v. Hagan
122 S.E. 248
Ga. Ct. App.
1924
Check Treatment
Luke, J.

1. The motion to dismiss the writ of error is without substantial merit. Ga. L. 1911, p. 150, § 3.

2. The evidence, though conflicting, authorized the verdict. Considered in connection with the entire charge, the excerpts therefrom upon which error was assigned áre not subject to any of the criticisms urged against them, and no reversible error is. made to appear.

(a) Under the 4th division of section 6149 of the Civil Code (1910), this court might, on its own motion, require the clerk of the trial court to certify and send up omitted parts of the record. In this case, however, it clearly appears that the judgment of the lower court should be affirmed whether such omitted part of the record be considered or not.

3. This court not being convinced that the writ of error in this case was prosecuted for the purpose of delay only, the request of the defendant 0in error that damages for such delay be awarded him is denied.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Rentz v. Hagan
Court Name: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Date Published: Mar 6, 1924
Citation: 122 S.E. 248
Docket Number: 14772
Court Abbreviation: Ga. Ct. App.
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.