Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
ยง

State Highway Department v. Smith

117 Ga. App. 210 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
State Highway Department v. Smith

3 Citing cases

  1. Lawson v. State

    278 Ga. App. 852 (Ga. Ct. App. 2006)   Cited 10 times

    Vaughn v. State, 173 Ga. App. 716, 718 (4) ( 327 SE2d 747) (1985). See State Hwy. Dept. v. Smith, 117 Ga. App. 210, 211 (2) ( 160 SE2d 215) (1968) (trial court erred in granting a new trial solely because one of the jurors was a nonresident of the county, where no objection was raised before verdict was returned). The procedure for objecting during voir dire is stated in OCGA ยง 15-12-163.

  2. Collins v. State

    266 Ga. App. 871 (Ga. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 5 times

    (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Trammell v. State, 183 Ga. 711, 715 (5) ( 189 SE 529) (1937); accord State Hwy. Dept. v. Smith, 117 Ga. App. 210, 211 (2) ( 160 SE2d 215) (1968). ELDRIDGE, Judge.

  3. Speer v. Gemco Elevator Co.

    134 Ga. App. 360 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 15 times
    In Speer v. Gemco Elevator Co., 134 Ga. App. 360 (214 S.E.2d 425) (1975), the trial court complied with the first provision of the CPA Rule 50 (c) (1), by ruling on the alternative motion for a new trial when ruling on the motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, but it did not comply with the second provision which requires that the order specify the grounds for granting or denying the motion for a new trial.

    Accordingly, if the special ground upon which the new trial was solely granted is determined by the appellate court to be without merit, the judgment granting the new trial on that ground will be reversed. State Hwy. Dept. v. Smith, 117 Ga. App. 210 ( 160 S.E.2d 215); State Hwy. Dept. v. Rosenfeld, 120 Ga. App. 439 ( 170 S.E.2d 837). Moreover, even where the trial court grants a new trial both on the general and one or more of the special grounds, and the reviewing court affirms on the general grounds, it is nevertheless necessary for the appellate court to review the rulings made by the trial court in granting a new trial on the special grounds.