Crockett Bros. v. Sibley

• Decision Date: 11 February 1908
• Docket Number: 648.
• Citation: 60 S.E. 326,3 Ga.App. 554
• Parties: CROCKETT BROS. et al. v. SIBLEY et al.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

60 S.E. 326

3 Ga.App. 554

CROCKETT BROS. et al. v. SIBLEY et al.

No. 648.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

February 11, 1908

Syllabus by the Court.

In a suit to recover damages for willful trespass in cutting timber, where the trespass was not denied, but was claimed to have been unintentional, section 3918 of the Civil Code of 1895, giving the measure of damages applicable to the two classes of trespass, was properly given in charge.

Where a willful trespass is committed by an agent, and there is evidence that it was either commanded or assented to by the principal, section 3031 of the Civil Code of 1895, on the ratification of torts, is applicable to the issues. It was not error for the court, in giving in charge to the jury the language of this section, to add, after the words "by his command or assented to by him," the words "or ratifies it." A tort for one's benefit may be ratified; the ratifier becoming liable as if he had commanded it. Civ. Code 1895, § 3820.

[Ed. Note.-For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 40, Principal and Agent, § 624.]

Where a trespass committed by an agent for his principal is not denied, but is claimed to have been unintentional, it is proper to instruct the jury on this issue that "the principal is bound for the care, diligence, and fidelity of his agent in his business." Civ. Code, 1895, § 3029.

Where the fact of trespass is admitted, it is not material error to admit hearsay testimony as to the location of the landmarks of the land lot upon which the trespass was committed.

[Ed. Note.-For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 3, Appeal and Error, §§ 4153-4160.]

There being conflict in the evidence as to the value of the timber cut, as well as in regard to whether the cutting was willful or unintentional, this court cannot interfere with the verdict approved by the trial judge.

Error from City Court of Polk County; F. A. Irwin, Judge.

Action between Crockett Bros. and others and R. P. Sibley and others, executors. From the judgment, Crockett Bros. and others bring error. Affirmed.

Mundy & Mundy, for plaintiffs in error.

Jno. K. Davis, for defendants in error.

HILL, C.J.

Judgment affirmed.