From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martin v. Denson

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 21, 1968
160 S.E.2d 210 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)

Opinion

43455.

SUBMITTED FEBRUARY 6, 1968.

DECIDED FEBRUARY 21, 1968.

Action for damages. Cobb Superior Court. Before Judge Ingram.

J. M. Grubbs, Jr., for appellant.

Jean E. Johnson, Sr., for appellee.


After a verdict for $800 in this negligence action, the trial court granted the plaintiff's motion for new trial on the general grounds. The defendant appeals from this judgment, contending that since the Civil Practice Act (Ga. L. 1966, p. 609, as amended; Code Ann. Title 81A) the first grant of a motion for new trial is subject to review as an abuse of discretion by the trial court. The law prior to the Civil Practice Act, supra, was that the first grant of a new trial was not error unless the evidence demanded a verdict for the party opposing the motion. Code § 6-1608; Harper v. Green, 113 Ga. App. 557 ( 149 S.E.2d 163). Neither the provision of the Civil Practice Act cited by the defendant ( Code Ann. § 81A-150 (c)) nor any other provision changes this rule. The defendant does not contend that the evidence demanded a verdict in his favor.

The trial court did not err in granting the plaintiff's motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed. Bell, P. J., and Quillian, J., concur.

SUBMITTED FEBRUARY 6, 1968 — DECIDED FEBRUARY 21, 1968.


Summaries of

Martin v. Denson

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Feb 21, 1968
160 S.E.2d 210 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
Case details for

Martin v. Denson

Case Details

Full title:MARTIN v. DENSON

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Feb 21, 1968

Citations

160 S.E.2d 210 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
117 Ga. App. 288

Citing Cases

Winn Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Whaley

1. The appellate courts have held time and again that the first grant of a motion for new trial will not be…

Smith v. Clark

Moreover, even if the appeal were properly here, this court will not disturb the first grant of a new trial…