Saul & Co. v. Schlomerg , 142 Ga. 245 ( 1914 )

Fish, C. J.

1. The evidence authorized thé jury to find that a partnership existed.

2. In the brief of counsel for plaintiffs in error it is stated that, while they do not abandon-any of the grounds of the motion for a new trial, all of the alleged errors revolve about the question whether or not the evidence construed most favorably for the plaintiffs made a case of partnership. Having held that it did, none of the other grounds of the motion is such as to require a reversal.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.