No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Sirmans
v.
Rose
v.
Rose
No. 914.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Jan 15, 1919.
Published opinion
W. D. Buie, Whitaker & Dukes, and Candler-, Thomson & Kirsch, for plaintiffs in error., E. K. Wilcox and Dan R. Bruce, contra.
Atkinson.
Published
Atkinson, J.
The assignments of error on the rulings upon admissibility of evidence show no error. The portions of the charge excepted to stated correct principles of law, and were properly adjusted to the pleadings and evidence. The evidence was sufficient to support the verdict for the plaintiff, and there was no error in refusing a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concur.