From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Powell

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 22, 1981
280 S.E.2d 336 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

In Taylor v. Powell, 158 Ga. App. 339 (280 S.E.2d 386) (1981), the Court of Appeals observed that "[t]he evidence shows that counsel for the plaintiffs made the concluding argument.

Summary of this case from Sheriff v. State
See 1 Summary

Opinion

61651.

DECIDED APRIL 22, 1981.

Action for damages. Burke Superior Court. Before Judge Pierce.

Gould B. Hagler, Duncan D. Wheale, for appellants.

George W. Fryhofer, Preston B. Lewis, Jr., for appellees.

SHULMAN, Presiding Judge.

Plaintiffs bring this appeal, alleging that the trial court, in violation of Code Ann. § 81-1004, permitted more than one counsel to speak on behalf of the defendants in closing argument.

The evidence shows that counsel for the plaintiffs made the concluding argument. No violation of Code Ann. § 81-1004 thus appears. See Duke v. Steed, 127 Ga. App. 541 ( 194 S.E.2d 257).

Judgment affirmed. Birdsong and Sognier, JJ., concur.

DECIDED APRIL 22, 1981.

Summaries of

Taylor v. Powell

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 22, 1981
280 S.E.2d 336 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)

In Taylor v. Powell, 158 Ga. App. 339 (280 S.E.2d 386) (1981), the Court of Appeals observed that "[t]he evidence shows that counsel for the plaintiffs made the concluding argument.

Summary of this case from Sheriff v. State
Case details for

Taylor v. Powell

Case Details

Full title:TAYLOR et al. v. POWELL et al

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Apr 22, 1981

Citations

280 S.E.2d 336 (Ga. Ct. App. 1981)
158 Ga. App. 339

Citing Cases

Williams v. Greenfield Equipment Company, Inc.

One attorney for the plaintiff began closing argument; the two defense attorneys then argued; and the…

Steverson v. Eason

There was no error in the court's handling of this matter. Taylor v. Powell, 158 Ga. App. 339 ( 280 S.E.2d…

4 Citing Cases