Cobb v. The Mayor

• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: TripPE
• Citation: Cobb v. The Mayor, 53 Ga. 426 (Ga. 1874)
• Decision Date: 31 July 1874
• Parties: James N. B. Cobb, plaintiff in error. v. The Mayor and Council oF the City oF Daeton, defendant in error.

53 Ga. 426

James N. B. Cobb, plaintiff in error. v. The Mayor and Council oF the City oF Daeton, defendant in error.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(Atlanta, July Term, 1874.)

Municipal corporations. Streets. Roads. Fines. Before Judge McCuTChen. Whitfield Superior Court. April Term, 1874.

James N. B. Cook brought case against the Mayor and Council of the city of Dalton for $10,000 00 damages, alleged to have sustained by him on account of the illegal arrest and imprisonment of his son, John V. Cobb, a minor. The defendant pleaded the general issue, and justified upon the ground that the arrest of said minor was legal, it being for his failure to pay a fine properly imposed upon him.

The evidence is unnecessary to an understanding of the *decision. The jury found for the defendant. The plaintiff moved for a new trial upon the following, among other grounds:

1st. Because the court erred in charging the jury as follows: "If the evidence shows that plaintiff's son, John, was notified to work on the streets of the city of Dalton, and that he refused or neglected so to do, and that after being summoned to answer for such default he was fined by the mayor and council therefor, and if a notice or rule nisi was served upon him requiring himto show cause why he should not be punished for his refusal or neglect to work or to pay the fine imposed for that default, and if the evidence further shows that the mayor and council, on the hearing of said rule, whether John Cobb appeared as required by said rule or not, committed him to the guard-house for his default aforesaid, such imprisonment would not authorize the plaintiff to recover in this case."

2d. Because the court erred in charging as follows: "The mayor and council had jurisdiction to enforce obedience to the by-laws of the city, and to enforce the payment of fines imposed under authority of the charter and by-laws of the city by imprisonment, and when such jurisdiction exists, a judicial officer, in the absence of bad faith, would not be liable to damages for a judicial act on account of simple irregularity alone. If such bad faith were shown to exist, while it would or might make the officer guilty of bad faith personally liable, would not make the corporation liable."

The motion was overruled, and the plaintiff excepted.

J. A. Glenn; Hanks & Bivings, for plaintiff in error.

Shumate & Williamson; C.E. BroylES, for defendant.

TripPE Judge.

Under the charter of the city of Dalton, the mayor and...