First Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta v. White

Decision Date19 October 1983
Docket NumberNo. 66263,66263
CitationFirst Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta v. White, 309 S.E.2d 858, 168 Ga.App. 516 (Ga. App. 1983)
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals
PartiesFIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF ATLANTA v. WHITE.

Albert B. Wallace, Jonesboro, for appellant.

Robert P. White, Atlanta, for appellee.

SOGNIER, Judge.

First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Atlanta (First Federal) sued Robert White seeking a deficiency judgment under a retail installment sales contract for the purchase of a mobile home. The jury returned a verdict in favor of First Federal in the amount sought. The jury also returned a verdict in favor of White in the amount of $3,000 damages on his counterclaim based upon breach of the peace in the repossession of the mobile home. First Federal appeals.

1. Appellee's motion to dismiss the appeal is denied. See OCGA § 5-6-48 (Code Ann. § 6-809).

2. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying its motions for a directed verdict and for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to appellee's counterclaim. The partial transcript forwarded to this court consists only of two excerpts from the proceedings below--the trial court's charge to the jury on nominal damages and the argument of appellant's counsel and the trial court's ruling on appellant's motion for a directed verdict.

"The burden is on the appellant to show error by the record, and when a portion of the evidence--whether it be testimony or documentary or physical in nature--bearing upon the issues raised by the enumerations of error, is not brought up in the appellate record so that this court can make its determination from a consideration of it all, an affirmance as to that issue must result. [Cits.]" Morris v. Hodge, 152 Ga.App. 815, 816-817, 264 S.E.2d 482 (1979). Because there is no evidence in the record to show whether a directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict was warranted (see OCGA § 9-11-50(a)-(b) (Code Ann. § 81A-150)), we must assume that the trial court was correct in its denial of appellant's motions and affirm. Morris, supra. See also American Vigorelli, Inc. v. Smith, Phillips & DiPietro, 157 Ga.App. 52, 276 S.E.2d 158 (1981); Castile v. Rich's, Inc., 131 Ga.App. 586, 587, 206 S.E.2d 851 (1974).

3. Appellant also contends that the trial court erred in overruling its motion for a new trial made on the ground that the $3,000 verdict returned on the counterclaim was contrary to the trial court's charge to the jury, and was excessive as nominal damages. The trial court instructed the jury as to the counterclaim that appellee had presented no evidence of special damage and the jury was therefore restricted to a consideration of nominal damages only.

Nominal damages are generally defined as a "trivial sum ... awarded where a breach of duty or an infraction of the plaintiff's right is shown, but no serious loss is proved." Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Glenn, 8 Ga.App. 168, 169, 68 S.E. 881 (1910). See Sellers v. Mann, 113 Ga. 643, 644, 39 S.E. 11 (1901); Ransone v. Christian, 56 Ga. 351, 353(6) (1876). However, in Georgia, the term "nominal damages" is "purely relative, and carries with it no suggestion of certainty as to amount ...." Sellers, supra 113 Ga. at 643(2), 39 S.E. 11. Instead of being restricted to a very small amount, the sum awarded as nominal damages may, according to circumstances, "vary almost indefinitely." Id. at 644, 39 S.E. 11. Thus, "[a] recovery may be classified as coming under the definition of nominal damages where the violation of a right is shown, substantial damages claimed, and some actual loss proved, and yet the damages are not susceptible of reasonable certainty of proof as to their extent." Glenn, supra 8 Ga.App. at 168(1), 68 S.E. 881. This premise was followed in Ponce de Leon etc. v. DiGirolamo, 238 Ga. 188, 190(3), 232 S.E.2d 62 (1977) and Duckworth v. Collier, 164 Ga.App. 139, 140(3), 296 S.E.2d 640 (1982), to hold that awards of nominal damages in the amounts of...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
12 cases
  • Miller & Meier & Associates v. Diedrich, 69481
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 15, 1985
    ...proved, and yet the damages are not susceptible of reasonable certainty of proof as to their extent.' " First Fed. Savings etc. Ass'n v. White, 168 Ga.App. 516(3), 309 S.E.2d 858 (1983). See also Duckworth v. Collier, 164 Ga.App. 139, 296 S.E.2d 640 Thus, the trial court erred in granting j......
  • Fowler's Holdings, LLLP v. CLP Family Invs., L.P.
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • October 18, 2012
    ...173, 175–178, 80 S.E. 516 (1914); Duckworth v. Collier, 164 Ga.App. 139, 140(3), 296 S.E.2d 640 (1982); First Fed. Sav. & Loan Assn. v. White, 168 Ga.App. 516, 517, 309 S.E.2d 858 (1983). An award of nominal damages in the amount of $120,000 in a case in which actual damages amounted at mos......
  • Griffin v. Jernigan
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • September 22, 2022
    ...Ga. Mar. 24, 2022) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 55(b)(1), (2)) (citations omitted). “In a case seeking damages, that analysis proceeds in two parts. First, final judgment may be entered if pleadings state a substantive cause of action and contain a sufficient basis to support the relief sought.” I......
  • Jones v. Padgett
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • March 3, 1988
    ...as nominal damages may, according to circumstances, 'vary almost indefinitely.' [Cit.]" First Fed. Savings, etc., Assn. of Atlanta v. White, 168 Ga.App. 516, 517(3), 309 S.E.2d 858 (1983). Having reviewed the evidence produced at trial, we cannot find that the nominal damages which were awa......
  • Get Started for Free
6 books & journal articles
  • AI A Thumbnail Sketch of Damages
    • United States
    • Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Georgia Benchbook 2023 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...damages may, according to circumstances, ‘vary almost indefinitely.’” (Cit’s omitted). First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Atlanta v. White, 168 Ga. App. 516, 516, 309 S.E.2d 858, 859 (1983). 2. $625,000 in nominal damages held not excessive. MTW Inv. Co. v. Alcovy Properties, Inc., 273 Ga. App......
  • Al A Thumbnail Sketch of Damages
    • United States
    • Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Georgia Benchbook 2017 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...the court sua sponte. B. Measure - "The sum awarded as nominal damages may, according to the circumstances, 'vary almost indefinitely'" [168 Ga.App. 516, 309 SE2d 858 (1983); 262 Ga.App. 659, 663, 586 SE2d 384 (2003) ($22,000 nominal damages not necessarily too much)]. The court should look......
  • Al A Thumbnail Sketch of Damages
    • United States
    • Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Georgia Benchbook 2018 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...the court sua sponte. B. Measure - "The sum awarded as nominal damages may, according to the circumstances, 'vary almost indefinitely'" [168 Ga.App. 516, 309 SE2d 858 (1983); 262 Ga.App. 659, 663, 586 SE2d 384 (2003) ($22,000 nominal damages not necessarily too much)]. The court should look......
  • Al A Thumbnail Sketch of Damages
    • United States
    • Judicial Council of Georgia Administrative Office of the Courts Georgia Benchbook 2015 edition
    • Invalid date
    ...the court sua sponte. B. Measure - "The sum awarded as nominal damages may, according to the circumstances, 'vary almost indefinitely'" [168 Ga.App. 516, 309 SE2d 858 (1983); 262 Ga.App. 659, 663, 586 SE2d 384 (2003) ($22,000 nominal damages not necessarily too much)]. The court should look......
  • Get Started for Free