Nipper v. Hancock., 97 Ga. App. 771, 104 S.E.2d 536 (1958)
Linked as:
Summary
Judgment affirmed. Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.
Summary
Judgment affirmed. Felton, C. J., and Nichols, J., concur.
Text
Peter W. Walton, contra.Bob Humphreys, for plaintiff in error.
Where exception is taken to the ruling out of certain evidence, a special ground of the motion for new trial must either set forth the evidence literally, in substance, or refer to the page number in the record where such evidence is located.
E. A. Hancock filed a suit against J. A. Nipper in two counts. Count 1 of the petition alleges in part: that the defendant borrowed $1,000 from the plaintiff; that the defendant repaid the plaintiff $350.15 of the debt; that the plaintiff has demanded the remaining amount due, but the defendant refuses to repay him.
Count 2 alleged in part that the defendant and plaintiff entered into an agreement whereby the defendant would pay the plaintiff $25 per week for a period of one year for his services; the plaintiff worked for the defendant for the one-year period, but the defendant has paid him only $750 of the $1,300 due him.
The defendant filed an answer in which he denied the material allegations of the petition.
On the trial the evidence was in conflict. The plaintiff testified that: the defendant employed him to work in his store at the rate of $25 per week for a period of one year; the defendant had paid him only $750 for the year's service that he performed; he also loaned the defendant $1,000 of which the defendant had repaid only $350.15.
The judge found for the plaintiff. The defendant filed a motion for a new trial which was denied and the defendant excepts.
1. While the evidence was in sharp conflict it was sufficient to support the verdict, and the general grounds of the motion for a new trial are without merit.
2. The only special ground of the amended motion for a new trial assigns error on the exclusion of certain evidence. While counsel did set forth the excluded evidence in his brief, the special ground fails to set forth the evidence referred to either literally, in substance, or by reference to the page number in the record, where such evidence is located as is permitted by Code (Ann.) 6-901. A special ground of a motion for new trial must be complete and understandable within itself. Where exception is taken to the ruling out of certain evidence, the special ground must either contain or specify the evidence excluded so as to enable this court to determine Whether such exclusion was harmful to the movant. Garvin v. State,
Sponsored links
