jury upon rule (Georgia) · Go Syfert
← Georgia issues

jury upon rule in Georgia

8 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1913–1979 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Georgia courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Mitchell v. Stategreen
gactapp · 1953 · cited in 1 Georgia opinions naming this issue, 1960–1960
2 sentences

1960The particular language excepted to, however, appears to have been inappropriate, and might have been confusing and misleading, inasmuch as the indictment, or even the prior conviction, of a principal does not establish the complicity of another, and in this case whether or not the defendant was an accomplice was one of the vital issues in the case.” Mitchell v. State, 89 Ga. App. 80, 85 ( 78 S. E. 2d 563 ) was reversed because of the charge that “the other three defendants are not on trial but appear in this case as accomplices,” and goes on to state: “The following charges have been held rev

1960The particular language excepted to, however, appears to have been inappropriate, and might have been confusing and misleading, inasmuch as the indictment, or even the prior conviction, of a principal does not establish the complicity of another, and in this case whether or not the defendant was an accomplice was one of the vital issues in the case.” Mitchell v. State, 89 Ga. App. 80, 85 ( 78 S. E. 2d 563 ) was reversed because of the charge that “the other three defendants are not on trial but appear in this case as accomplices,” and goes on to state: “The following charges have been held rev

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (10)

CaseCitedYears
Threlkeld v. State green
ga · 1907
2 sentences

1924Threlkeld v. State, 128 Ga. 660 ( 58 S. E. 49 ).

1924Threlkeld v. State, 128 Ga. 660 ( 58 S. E. 49 ).

21918–1924
Addison v. Cowart neutral
gactapp · 1931
1 sentence

1979Since we have held, in Division 1 of this opinion, that "there was no evidence from which the jury might, with reasonable accuracy, have assessed the amount of the diminution .. . the court did not err, therefore, in failing to charge the jury upon the defense of a partial failure of consideration.” Addison v. Cowart, 43 Ga. App. 365 (2) ( 158 SE 804 ) (1931). 3.

11979–1979
McDaniel v. Bristol neutral
sc · 1931
1 sentence

1979Since we have held, in Division 1 of this opinion, that "there was no evidence from which the jury might, with reasonable accuracy, have assessed the amount of the diminution .. . the court did not err, therefore, in failing to charge the jury upon the defense of a partial failure of consideration.” Addison v. Cowart, 43 Ga. App. 365 (2) ( 158 SE 804 ) (1931). 3.

11979–1979
Palmer v. Stevens green
gactapp · 1967
1 sentence

1970Palmer v. Stevens, 115 Ga. App. 398 , supra. The fourth and fifth enumerations of error complain of the court’s charge to the jury upon the defense of assumption of risk.

11970–1970
Sellers v. State neutral
gactapp · 1930
1 sentence

1960The particular language excepted to, however, appears to have been inappropriate, and might have been confusing and misleading, inasmuch as the indictment, or even the prior conviction, of a principal does not establish the complicity of another, and in this case whether or not the defendant was an accomplice was one of the vital issues in the case.” Mitchell v. State, 89 Ga. App. 80, 85 ( 78 S. E. 2d 563 ) was reversed because of the charge that “the other three defendants are not on trial but appear in this case as accomplices,” and goes on to state: “The following charges have been held rev

11960–1960
Demonia v. State green
gactapp · 1943
2 sentences

1960The particular language excepted to, however, appears to have been inappropriate, and might have been confusing and misleading, inasmuch as the indictment, or even the prior conviction, of a principal does not establish the complicity of another, and in this case whether or not the defendant was an accomplice was one of the vital issues in the case.” Mitchell v. State, 89 Ga. App. 80, 85 ( 78 S. E. 2d 563 ) was reversed because of the charge that “the other three defendants are not on trial but appear in this case as accomplices,” and goes on to state: “The following charges have been held rev

1960The particular language excepted to, however, appears to have been inappropriate, and might have been confusing and misleading, inasmuch as the indictment, or even the prior conviction, of a principal does not establish the complicity of another, and in this case whether or not the defendant was an accomplice was one of the vital issues in the case.” Mitchell v. State, 89 Ga. App. 80, 85 ( 78 S. E. 2d 563 ) was reversed because of the charge that “the other three defendants are not on trial but appear in this case as accomplices,” and goes on to state: “The following charges have been held rev

11960–1960
Speed v. State neutral
ga · 1933
2 sentences

1934Speed v. State, 176 Ga. 751 (5) ( 168 S. E. 891 ). 3.

1934Speed v. State, 176 Ga. 751 (5) ( 168 S. E. 891 ). 3.

11934–1934
Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Reed green
gactapp · 1926
2 sentences

1931Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Reed, 35 Ga. App. 538 (6) ( 134 S. E. 134 ). 5.

1931Western & Atlantic Railroad v. Reed, 35 Ga. App. 538 (6) ( 134 S. E. 134 ). 5.

11931–1931
Lewis v. State neutral
ga · 1906
2 sentences

1913Lewis v. State, 125 Ga. 48 ( 53 S. E. 816 ); Lewis v. State, 129 Ga. 731 ( 59 S. E. 782 ). 2.

1913Lewis v. State, 125 Ga. 48 ( 53 S. E. 816 ); Lewis v. State, 129 Ga. 731 ( 59 S. E. 782 ). 2.

11913–1913
Lewis v. State neutral
ga · 1907
2 sentences

1913Lewis v. State, 125 Ga. 48 ( 53 S. E. 816 ); Lewis v. State, 129 Ga. 731 ( 59 S. E. 782 ). 2.

1913Lewis v. State, 125 Ga. 48 ( 53 S. E. 816 ); Lewis v. State, 129 Ga. 731 ( 59 S. E. 782 ). 2.

11913–1913

Where else courts name it

CA 22 (1911–2019) MO 14 (1915–1991) GA 8 (1913–1979) FL 6 (1937–1970) OK 5 (1911–1986) PA 4 (1916–1986) IN 3 (1928–1980) TX 3 (1906–1955) NY 3 (1930–1964) NH 2 (1856–1995) OR 2 (1892–1950) NC 2 (1981–2011) CO 2 (1934–1970) CT 2 (1890–1984) MN 2 (1915–1921)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check