
    4452.
    Rowland v. Bell.
    Decided January 22, 1913.
    Certiorari; from Fulton superior court—Judge Bell. September 19, 1912.
    
      Frank L. Neufville, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Stevens & Ogburn, contra.
   Hei, C. J.

1. Nothing is better settled than the principle that unless the judgment rendered in the lower court is absolutely demanded by the evidence, the first grant of a new trial on certiorari, in the absence of any controlling question of law, will not be disturbed. Fair v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 2 Ga. App. 376 (58 S. E. 492); Freeman v. Maxwell, 10 Ga. App. 316 (73 S. E. 349); Cochran v. Minter, 10 Ga. App. 377 (73 S. E. 551).

2. In the present case the jury in the justice’s court found a verdict generally for the defendant, when the undisputed evidence showed that the plaintiff was entitled to recover at least a part of the account sued on. The judgment, therefore, remanding the case for another trial, was not affected by the overruling of exceptions to the magistrate’s answer.

Judgment affirmed.  