History
  • No items yet
midpage
McDonald v. State
17 Ala. App. 695
| Ala. Ct. App. | 1919
|
Check Treatment

There is no brief filed for the appellant in this cause, but his insistence is set forth in the motion for a new trial, in which he assigns four grounds: (1) That the verdict was contrary to the evidence; (2) that there was not sufficient evidence to support the verdict; (3) because the court refused to give the affirmative charge as requested by the defendant; and (4) that there was not sufficient evidence to support the judgment. We have carefully examined the evidence in this case, and are of the opinion that it was a question for the jury under the facts, and that the entire case was submitted to the jury under a full, fair, and impartial charge from the trial court. There is no error in the record, and the judgment is in all things affirmed. Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: McDonald v. State
Court Name: Alabama Court of Appeals
Date Published: Mar 18, 1919
Citation: 17 Ala. App. 695
Docket Number: 8 Div. 530.
Court Abbreviation: Ala. 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.