7 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1906–1979 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
McCorquodale v. Stategreen2 sentences1979"Photographs which tend to show relevant and material facts are admissible although it is alleged that they are designed to inflame and prejudice the jury.” McCorquodale v. State, 233 Ga. 369, 375 ( 211 SE2d 577 ) (1974). 2. 1979"Photographs which tend to show relevant and material facts are admissible although it is alleged that they are designed to inflame and prejudice the jury.” McCorquodale v. State, 233 Ga. 369, 375 ( 211 SE2d 577 ) (1974). 2. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Dwelle & Daniel v. Blackwood
green
2 sentences1970Cowan v. Bank of Baconton, 21 Ga. App. 645 (1) ( 94 SE 808 ), and Dwelle & Daniel v. Blackwood, 106 Ga. 486 (2) ( 32 SE 593 ). 1970Cowan v. Bank of Baconton, 21 Ga. App. 645 (1) ( 94 SE 808 ), and Dwelle & Daniel v. Blackwood, 106 Ga. 486 (2) ( 32 SE 593 ). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Minor v. Hull
green
1 sentence1970Cowan v. Bank of Baconton, 21 Ga. App. 645 (1) ( 94 SE 808 ), and Dwelle & Daniel v. Blackwood, 106 Ga. 486 (2) ( 32 SE 593 ). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Cowan v. Bank of Baconton
green
1 sentence1970Cowan v. Bank of Baconton, 21 Ga. App. 645 (1) ( 94 SE 808 ), and Dwelle & Daniel v. Blackwood, 106 Ga. 486 (2) ( 32 SE 593 ). | 1 | 1970–1970 |
Blakely Oil & Fertilizer Co. v. Proctor & Gamble Co.
green
1 sentence1965Co. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 134 Ga. 139 ( 67 SE 389 ). | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Black v. Weaver
green
1 sentence1965Co. v. Proctor & Gamble Co., 134 Ga. 139 ( 67 SE 389 ). | 1 | 1965–1965 |
Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith
green
1 sentence1962We do not have involved here the rule announced in Garner v. Gwinnett County, 105 Ga. App. 714 ( 125 SE2d 563 ); Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith, 164 Ga. *637 811 (4) ( 139 SE 716 ); and Landrum v. Swann, 8 Ga. App. 209 ( 68 SE 862 ), that a witness may give his opinion as to the value of property although his testimony rests upon hearsay. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Landrum v. Swann
green
1 sentence1962We do not have involved here the rule announced in Garner v. Gwinnett County, 105 Ga. App. 714 ( 125 SE2d 563 ); Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith, 164 Ga. *637 811 (4) ( 139 SE 716 ); and Landrum v. Swann, 8 Ga. App. 209 ( 68 SE 862 ), that a witness may give his opinion as to the value of property although his testimony rests upon hearsay. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Summerford v. Meyer & Co.
green
1 sentence1962We do not have involved here the rule announced in Garner v. Gwinnett County, 105 Ga. App. 714 ( 125 SE2d 563 ); Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith, 164 Ga. *637 811 (4) ( 139 SE 716 ); and Landrum v. Swann, 8 Ga. App. 209 ( 68 SE 862 ), that a witness may give his opinion as to the value of property although his testimony rests upon hearsay. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
Garner v. Gwinnett County
green
2 sentences1962We do not have involved here the rule announced in Garner v. Gwinnett County, 105 Ga. App. 714 ( 125 SE2d 563 ); Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith, 164 Ga. *637 811 (4) ( 139 SE 716 ); and Landrum v. Swann, 8 Ga. App. 209 ( 68 SE 862 ), that a witness may give his opinion as to the value of property although his testimony rests upon hearsay. 1962We do not have involved here the rule announced in Garner v. Gwinnett County, 105 Ga. App. 714 ( 125 SE2d 563 ); Gulf Refining Co. v. Smith, 164 Ga. *637 811 (4) ( 139 SE 716 ); and Landrum v. Swann, 8 Ga. App. 209 ( 68 SE 862 ), that a witness may give his opinion as to the value of property although his testimony rests upon hearsay. | 1 | 1962–1962 |
M'Cleskey v. Leadbetter
green
1 sentence1923As far back as the case of McCleskey v. Leadbetter, 1 Ga. 551 , it was held: “A party claiming under a grantor, as distributee or legatee, can not impeach his deed for want of consideration, or because it was intended to defraud creditors. | 1 | 1923–1923 |
Nicol & Davidson v. Crittenden
green
1 sentence1908See, in this connection, Civil Code, §§3529, 2695 (2) ; Nicol v. Crittenden, 55 Ga. 497 . ¡Judgment affirmed. | 1 | 1908–1908 |
Gress Lumber Co. v. Coody
green
1 sentence1906Belative to the description of the one-acre tract mentioned in the Towns deed, counsel for plaintiff contend that the description is-sufficient, and in support of their position cite Gress Lumber Co. v. Coody, 94 Ga. 519 ; Vaughn v. Fitzgerald, 112 Ga. 517 . | 1 | 1906–1906 |
Vaughn v. Fitzgerald
green
1 sentence1906Belative to the description of the one-acre tract mentioned in the Towns deed, counsel for plaintiff contend that the description is-sufficient, and in support of their position cite Gress Lumber Co. v. Coody, 94 Ga. 519 ; Vaughn v. Fitzgerald, 112 Ga. 517 . | 1 | 1906–1906 |
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.