Hall v. Mclendon

• Decision Date: 20 October 1919
• Docket Number: (No. 10365.)
• Citation: 24 Ga.App. 292,100 S.E. 726
• Parties: HALL et al. v. McLENDON et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

24 Ga.App. 292

100 S.E. 726

HALL et al.

v.McLENDON et al.

(No. 10365.)

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

Oct. 20, 1919.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

ground that the entry of levy (which the plaintiff in execution had introduced in evidence) recited that the property was levied on 'as the property of, and in possession of, the defendant.' " See, also, Southern Ry. Co. v. Gresham, 114 Ga. 183, 39 S. E. 8S3(1); Northington v. Granade, 118 Ga. 584, 45 S. E. 447(2); Taylor v. Bank of Tifton, 140 Ga. 45, 78 S. E. 335; Baird v. Hill, 141 Ga. 15, 80 S. E. 281; Morris v. Reed, 14 Ga. App. 729, 82 S. E. 314 (4); Wisenbaker v. West Yellow Pine Co., 16 Ga. App. 699, 86 S. E. 46(5).

(a) Under the facts of this case the court erred in permitting the claimant to open and conclude the argument, and while this right is generally an important and valuable one (Widincamp v. Widincamp, 135 Ga. 644, 70 S. E. 566), yet where, as in this case, the verdict as rendered was demanded by the evidence, an erroneous ruling with reference to the right to open and conclude the argument cannot in any event be reversible error. Moore v. Brown, 81 Ga. 10, 6 S. E. 833(3a); Madison Supply & Hardware Co. v. Richardson, 8 Ga. App. 344, 69 S. E. 45(5); Bank of Omega v. Youmans, 21 Ga. App. 284, 94 S. E. 279.

Error from City Court of Nashville; J. D. Lovett, Judge.

Proceedings in fi. fa. by J. W. and C. I. Hall against S. J. McLendon, with claim by Nancy S. McLendon, wife of defendant in fi. fa., to the goods levied upon. Verdict for claimant, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

R. A. Hendricks, of Nashville, for plaintiffs in error.

Jos. A. Alexander, of Nashville, for defendant in error.

JENKINS, P. J. Judgment affirmed.

STEPHENS and SMITH, JJ., concur.