Gress Lumber Co. v. Coody

• Citation: 30 S.E. 810,104 Ga. 611
• Parties: GRESS LUMBER CO. v. COODY.
• Decision Date: 26 May 1896
• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia

30 S.E. 810

104 Ga. 611

GRESS LUMBER CO. v. COODY.

Supreme Court of Georgia

May 26, 1896

Syllabus by the Court.

1. In the trial of a suit for damages for a trespass to realty, it was not error for the court to charge the jury, in effect, that, if they found that the plaintiff was entitled to damages, they might, if they saw proper, add thereto interest on the same from the time that such damages accrued to the date of their finding, and embrace the whole in one amount.

2. The verdict was supported by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Error from superior court, Dodge county; Z. A. Littlejohn, Judge.

Action by S. B. Coody against the Gress Lumber Company. Verdict for plaintiff. From an order overruling a motion for new trial, defendant brings error. Affirmed.

De Lacy & Bishop, for plaintiff in error.

E. A. Smith, D. M. Roberts, and Harrison & Bryan, for defendant in error.

SIMMONS, C.J.

1. Coody brought his action against the Gress Lumber Company for damages sustained by reason of trespass upon his land. There was a verdict for the plaintiff. To the overruling of its motion for a new trial the defendant excepted. One of the grounds of the motion was that the court erred in charging: "If you should find from the evidence that the plaintiff is entitled to a certain amount of damages, then you have a right, if you see proper (and that is left with the jury), to go further with your investigation, and ascertain what amount of interest has accrued from the time that damage was sustained, and render that with your verdict. Calculate the interest upon the amount that you find the plaintiff is entitled to recover from the time of the damages up to the time of the rendition of your verdict, and add it in as a part of your verdict." In all cases of tort of this character, it is within the discretion of the jury to take into account interest as part of the damages, and add it to their verdict, but not to give it as interest eo nomine. The court therefore did not err in charging the jury as above set out. Railroad Co. v. Sears, 66 Ga. 499; Railroad Co. v. McCauley, 68 Ga. 818.

2. The finding of the jury was supported by the evidence, and the court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

All the justices concurring.