Fountain v. Bryan
| Decision Date | 03 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 27128,27128 |
| Citation | 229 Ga. 120,189 S.E.2d 400 |
| Parties | J. D. FOUNTAIN v. Inard N. BRYAN et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Culpepper & Culpepper, Sampson M. Culpepper, Ft. Valley, for appellant.
Nunn, Geiger & Rampey, Sam A. Nunn, Jr., George F. Nunn, Jr., Perry, for appellees.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Bryan sought mandamus to compel the County Commissioners of Peach County to maintain 'Roads End Farm Road' which Fountain, the individual defendant, contended is a private road located on his land. The issue of whether the road is a public or private road was submitted to a jury, all parties stipulating that this was the controlling issue of fact, and the jury found for the plaintiff, and the trial judge granted mandamus absolute. Fountain moved for a new trial, and appeals the overruling of his motion as amended. Held:
1. The trial judge did not err in admitting a plat of the road identified and described by the surveyor who prepared it and the objection that the plat is immaterial and irrelevant is without merit. Although the surveyor made it clear that the plat was not made in his official capacity of county surveyor, and although it is clear that the plat did not qualify as a survey under Code § 23-1112, it was admissible as part of and illustrative of the oral testimony of the surveyor describing the location of the road. Durden v. Kerby, 201 Ga. 780, 41 S.E.2d 131; Fendley v. Weaver, 121 Ga.App. 526, 174 S.E.2d 369. Even if there was general agreement as to the location of the road, the plat served to identify and fix the precise location, and it is apparently the same plat referred to by the trial judge in identifying the road in his order for mandamus absolute.
2. The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for directed verdict at the conclusion of the plaintiff's evidence on the ground that the plaintiff had no standing to maintain the suit because the plaintiff had no interest in any property affected thereby. The undisputed evidence discloses that the plaintiff is a resident and citizen of Peach County, and thus a proper applicant to seek mandamus to compel the maintenance of a public road under Code § 64-102. The evidence overcomes the controlling defect present in the related case of Fountain v. Suber, 225 Ga. 361, 169 S.E.2d 162.
3. The trial judge did not err in overruling the motion for directed verdict at the close of the evidence on the ground the evidence demands the conclusion that the road is not a public road. In view of all the evidence pro...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Suber v. Fountain, 57864
...disagreement and has resulted in two prior appellate cases Fountain v. Suber, 225 Ga. 361, 169 S.E.2d 162 (1969) and Fountain v. Bryan, 229 Ga. 120, 189 S.E.2d 400 (1972). Thereafter, defendant Fountain filed an action in 1973 against plaintiff Suber to enjoin the plaintiff from interfering......
-
Stein v. Maddox
...bring an action for mandamus to require his county government to maintain a public road in passable condition. See Fountain v. Bryan, 229 Ga. 120(2),189 S.E.2d 400 (1972). There appears to be a genuine issue as to whether the Old Roswell-Duluth Road is a public road. Fulton County has never......
-
Gilman Paper Co. v. James, 30202
...conditions found on the ground by the surveyor. See, Durden v. Kerby, 210 Ga. 780, 782, 41 S.E.2d 131 (1947); and, Fountain v. Bryan, 229 Ga. 120(1), 189 S.E.2d 400 (1972). Thus it was not error to admit the plat, and the testimony of the surveyor who made it, for the jury's The judgment is......
-
King v. Browning, 35981
...Similarly, documentary evidence illustrative of oral testimony and authenticated by oral testimony is admissible. Fountain v. Bryan, 229 Ga. 120, 189 S.E.2d 400 (1972); Savannah Ice Delivery Co. v. Ayers, 127 Ga.App. 560, 194 S.E.2d 330 (1972). Further, where the admissibility of such evide......