Grant v. Dannals, 34284
| Decision Date | 07 January 1953 |
| Docket Number | No. 2,No. 34284,34284,2 |
| Citation | 74 S.E.2d 119,87 Ga.App. 389 |
| Parties | GRANT v. DANNALS |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Questions as to value are peculiarly within the province of the jury; and where there is sufficient evidence, either direct or circumstantial, to enable the jury to determine the difference in the value of the property before and after the damage inflicted, both from the opinion evidence offered and from evidence as to the type of property and amount of damage inflicted, the verdict based on these facts cannot be said to be merely speculative and conjectural.
2. The verdict was supported by the evidence and, having the approval of the trial court, will not be disturbed by this court.
Charles Dannals, Jr., brought suit in the Civil Court of Fulton County against Jesse W. Grant for damages arising out of an intersection collision at the corner of Houston Street and Piedmont Avenue in the City of Atlanta, setting out special damages of $700, being $500 damage to the automobile and $200 for loss of use. The evidence, in its light most favorable to support the verdict, was to the effect: that Piedmont Avenue at that point is a one-way street for southbound traffic, accommodating three lines of traffic; that Dannals was driving his car in the east, or farthest lane from the point at which the defendant entered the intersection on Houston Street; that Dannals' car and those of two other persons heading the two other traffic lanes were stopped by the red intersection traffic light; that, as the light turned green, these three cars moved into the intersection; those to the plaintiff's right moving first; that these two cars suddenly stopped as the defendant entered the intersection from their right against the red light, and the plaintiff also attempted to stop but was unable to avoid a collision with the defendant's automobile in the southeastern quadrant of the intersection. The testimony of the plaintiff to this effect was corroborated by that of a police officer in a patrol car following that of the plaintiff.
The jury returned a verdict of $500. The defendant filed his motion for a new trial on the general grounds, which was later amended by the addition of two grounds denominated amplifications of the general grounds. The overruling of this motion is assigned as error.
Ralph R. Quillian, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Lokey, Bowden & Rolleston and Charles M. Lokey, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
TOWNSEND, Judge (after stating the foregoing facts).
1. The primary contention of the plaintiff in error is that the value of the automobile before and after the accident was not properly proved, as a result of which the verdict of $500 was the result of mere surmise and speculation, and should be set aside. On this question the plaintiff testified as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Department of Transp. v. Driggers, 57424
...at a verdict, Provided there are in evidence sufficient facts from which they may draw a legitimate conclusion.' Grant v. Dannals, 87 Ga.App. 389, 391, 74 S.E.2d 119, 121." Ga. Power Co. v. Harwell, 113 Ga.App. 653, 654, 149 S.E.2d 376, 377 (Emphasis supplied.) Accord, Shoemaker v. United S......
-
Peoples Loan & Finance Corporation v. Lawson
...loan, relied on the fact of actual possession of the cars by the sender, it could not assert the defense of estoppel. 3 Grant v. Dannals, 87 Ga.App. 389, 74 S.E.2d 119; Farm Products Co. v. Eubanks, 29 Ga.App. 604, 116 S.E. 327; Frost & Co. v. Powell, 10 Ga.App. 95, 72 S.E. 1 "The Company a......
-
Georgia Power Co. v. Harwell
...at a verdict, provided there is in evidence sufficient facts from which they may draw a legitimate conclusion.' Grant v. Dannals, 87 Ga.App. 389, 391 74 S.E.2d 119, 121. 'Questions of value are peculiarly for the determination of the jury where there is any data in the evidence upon which t......
-
Sentry Ins. v. Henderson
...there is evidence of sufficient facts from which they may draw from their own experience in reaching a conclusion. See Grant v. Dannals, 87 Ga.App. 389, 391, 74 S.E.2d 119; Dixon v. Cassels Co., 34 Ga.App. 478(3), 130 S.E. 75; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Clements, 92 Ga.App. 451, 455, 88 ......