Curry v. Roberson

• Decision Date: 14 March 1953
• Docket Number: No. 2,No. 34529,34529,2
• Citation: 75 S.E.2d 282,87 Ga.App. 785
• Parties: CURRY v. ROBERSON
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 282

75 S.E.2d 282

87 Ga.App. 785

CURRY v.ROBERSON.

No. 34529.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.

March 14, 1953.

Syllabus by the Court.

It is error for the trial court to direct a verdict where there is some evidence which, together with all reasonable deductions and inferences therefrom, would support a verdict in favor of the party against whom the verdict is directed.

R. D. Roberson filed an attachment against W. C. Curry in the Municipal Court of Columbus for the principal sum of $300.The declaration in attachment alleged that on or about May 17, 1952, the plaintiff paid the defendant $300 as earnest money under an agreement whereby the defendant agreed to assign to the plaintiff a rental lease together with improvements located on the premises, to obtain a five-year renewal option from the landlord, and to sell the plaintiff certain items of personal property; and that the defendant did not consummate this transaction and refused to refund the earnest money although demand therefor had been made.It appeared from the evidence on the trial that the subject matter of the agreement was the sale of property constituting a miniature golf course, and the lease of the property on which it was located.On at least two issues of fact the evidence was irreconcilable: the plaintiff contended that the five-year lease renewal obtained for him by the defendant from the owner of the land contained a provision that the leased realty could not be used for any other purpose than a miniature golf course without written consent of the lessor, while the defendant and a witness in his behalf, while conceding this provision in the new lease, testified that the same provision had been included in the original lease, which testimony was denied by the plaintiff.Further, the plaintiff testified that the agreement entered into on May 17, 1952, was between himself and the defendant, and that the earnest money, which was delivered to the defendant by mail in the form of a check for $300, signed 'Joe Jones,' by the father-in-law of the plaintiff, represented money loaned to him by his father-in-law, the contract being his individual undertaking.The defendant denied this, but testified that a previous offer by him to sell the property and lease for $4000 to the plaintiff had been refused, and that the agreement of May 17, to sell the property for $3000, was between himself and Joe Jones individually, with the plaintiff acting merely as agent for Jones.

At the close of the evidence a verdict was directed for the plaintiff, and this ruling is assigned as error.

John H. Land, Columbus, for plaintiff in error.

J. Alvan Davis, William L. Slaughter, Columbus, for defendant in error.

TOWNSEND, Judge.

'In order for the directing of a verdict to be error, it must appear that there was some evidence, together with all reasonable deductions and...