Community Ed. Center, Inc. v. Cohen
| Decision Date | 04 September 1979 |
| Docket Number | No. 57663,57663 |
| Parties | COMMUNITY EDUCATION CENTER, INC. v. COHEN et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
B. T. Edmonds, Atlanta, for appellant.
Clayton Jones, Jr., Albany, for appellees.
Appellees-landlords brought a dispossessory action against appellant-tenant for nonpayment of rent. The trial court granted plaintiffs-appellees' motion for directed verdict on the grounds that defendant had failed to establish an affirmative defense to plaintiffs' prima facie case. On appeal, we reverse.
1. In granting appellees' motion for directed verdict, the trial court held that defendant's failure to establish the reasonable cost of repairs mandated a verdict for appellees. Appellant asserts as error the court's denial of its motion to reopen the case to present evidence of the cost of repairs. This is well taken.
While it is generally within the court's discretion to allow a case to be reopened, "(i)n the present case the presiding judge did not apparently exercise his discretion in denying (defendant's) motion to allow the case to be reopened . . . (nor did he) base such ruling on the facts of the particular case." Penn v. Ga. Southern etc., R. Co., 129 Ga. 856, 859, 60 S.E. 172, 173. Rather, in the case at bar, the court ruled that as defendant had "closed" and not "rested" following the presentation of evidence, defendant could not as a matter of law reopen its case. The court, thus, did not deny defendant's motion to reopen in the exercise of its discretion, but because it erroneously determined that such motion could not properly be granted after defendant had "closed." See, e. g., Newman v. Booker & Co., 133 Ga.App. 209(1), 210 S.E.2d 329, holding that "(i)t is within the discretionary power of the court to allow the case to be reopened after both sides have closed; and to hear additional evidence . . ." The court's failure to exercise such discretion therefore constitutes reversible error. Penn, supra.
2. Appellant contends that the court erred in allowing plaintiffs to reopen their case upon appellant's motion for a directed verdict. We cannot agree.
In this instance, the court properly exercised its discretion in reopening the case. This being so, appellant was not entitled to judgment in its favor. Zappa v. Higgins, 116 Ga.App. 81(2), 156 S.E.2d 521; Ellenberg v. Southern R. Co., 5 Ga.App. 389(2), 63 S.E. 240.
As we are reversing the judgment for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leno v. Ehli
...or denied. See, e.g., McCullough v. Leftwich, 232 Ark. 99, 102, 334 S.W.2d 707, 709 (1960); Community Education Center, Inc. v. Cohen, 151 Ga.App. 77, 78, 258 S.E.2d 742, 743 (1979); Serijanian v. Associated Material and Supply Co., 7 Mich.App. 275, 279-282, 151 N.W.2d 345, 347-348 (1967); ......
-
Plaza Pontiac, Inc. v. Shaw
...It is within the trial court's discretion to allow a party to reopen its case and present additional evidence. Community Ed. Center v. Cohen, 151 Ga.App. 77, 258 S.E.2d 742. Enforcement of the rule of sequestration is also a matter of the trial court's discretion. Simonton v. State, 151 Ga.......
-
Cook v. State, 59176
...742), we must reverse the trial court's judgment. Compare Meyers v. Glover, 152 Ga.App. 679, 263 S.E.2d 539; Community Ed. Center, Inc. v. Cohen, 151 Ga.App. 77(1), 258 S.E.2d 742. Conlogue v. State, 243 Ga. 141(4), 253 S.E.2d 168, does not demand a contrary result. The Supreme Court in Con......
-
Northern Assur. Co. of America v. Roll
...by allowing plaintiff to reopen his case after he rested and after defendant moved for a directed verdict. Community Education Ctr. v. Cohen, 151 Ga.App. 77, 78(2), 258 S.E.2d 742. Enumeration of error 17 is without 10. The issues raised by plaintiff in the cross-appeal are moot. Judgment a......