Jolly v. State, 63 S.E. 520 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909). · Go Syfert
Search
Jolly v. State, 63 S.E. 520 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
35 citation events across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Curry v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad (gactapp, 1941-09-24)
Treatment trajectory · 1910 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1910 1968 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Curry v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Ga. Ct. App. · 1941 · confidence medium
Co., 5 Ga. App. 454, 457 ( 63 S. E. 530 ).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Durden
Ga. Ct. App. · 1921 · confidence medium
“This was not contributory negligence lessening the damages, but the failure to avoid a known danger, which defeats a right to recover." In Ayers v. L. & N. Railroad Co., 5 Ga. App. 454, 456 ( 63 S. E. 530 ), Judge Powell said: “Pleadings are construed most strongly against the pleader, . . and if the pleadings are capable of two constructions, the most unfavorable to the pleader must obtain. . .
cited Cited "see" Piedmont Engineering & Construction Corp. v. Hanna Paint Co.
Ga. Ct. App. · 1957 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dye v. Peacock, 5 Ga. App. 417 ( 63 S. E. 520 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jolly
v.
State
1511.
Court of Appeals of Georgia.
Jan 27, 1909.
63 S.E. 520
Hixon & Greer, L. J. Blalock, for plaintiff in error., Jule Felton, solicitor,- contra.
Russell.
Cited by 9 opinions  |  Published
Russell, J.

The determination of the credibility of the witnesses is so-exclusively within the province of the jury that the verdict finding a defendant guilty is not affected by the fact that that verdict is supported by the testimony of only one witness, whose testimony is directly in conflict with a large number of witnesses who had equal opportunity of knowing the facts, and' who, so far as appears from the record, are-worthy of credit. In the absence of any error on the part of the court or any irregularity which may have prejudiced the defendant, such a verdict, approved by the trial judge, is absolutely conclusive; because this court is without jurisdiction to review a finding upon the-facts, which is supported by sufficient evidence.

Judgment affirmed.