Harvey v. Head
| Decision Date | 30 September 1881 |
| Citation | 68 Ga. 247 |
| Parties | Harvey. vs. Head. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
[Speer, Justice, being disqualified In this case, Judge Underwood, of the Rome Circuit was appointed to preside in his stead.]
Verdict. Judgment. Parties. Claim. Evidence. Res Adjudicata. Principal and Surety. Before Judge Lawson. Monroe Superior Court. August Term, 1880.
Reported in the decision.
Stone & Turner, T. B. Cabaniss; Jno D. Stewart; Jno. I. Hall, for plaintiff in error.
A. D. Hammond, for defendant.
R. T. Harvey sued out an attachment against C. C. Wilson, and caused the same to be levied on a tract of land in Monroe county, containing 180 acres, and one-half interest in a house and lot in the town of Forsyth. Judgment was obtained at the September term, 1876, of Monroe superior court, for the sum of three thousand eight hundred and eighty-five dollars and fifteen cents, principal and interest four thousand six hundred and forty-five dollars and seventy-five cents, and costs, against the property levied on. Execution issued and was levied on the property attached, which was claimed by Josiah Freeman, trustee for Mrs. Sarah A. Freeman, who gave W. H. Head as security on the damage and cost bond. The claim case was tried at August term, 1878, of Monroe superior court, and the following verdict was rendered: " We, the jury, find the property subject, and twenty-six per cent damages." At the same term of the court judgment was signed up by plaintiff's attorneys against the claimant and W. H. Head security, for the cost, and two hundred and sixty dollars damages being twenty-six per cent on one thousand dollars, the judgment stating the value of the property, one thousand dollars. The judgment thus signed was approved by his honor, Judge Grice, who tried the claim case. The judgment declared the property subject to the execution, and that the value of the property levied on was one thousand dollars (the sum due on the judgment was more than eight thousand dollars), and in terms adjudged in favor of plaintiff in fi. fa., two hundred and sixty dollars against claimant and W. H. Head, security, as damages. Execution was duly issued on this judgment against claimant and Head, the security for the amount, and levied on theproperty of Head, the security. Head filed an affidavit of illegality to the judgment and execution. There are many grounds of illegality which need not be stated, as the decision of the judge, who was selected by the parties to hear both law and facts, set out the ground held to be good, and overruled all other grounds as follows: "So much of the illegality as sets up that the judgment rendered at the August term, 1878, and the execution issued thereon are void, on the ground that there was no verdict to authorize such judgment and execution, is sustained, and the remaining grounds of the illegality are overruled."
This last mentioned decision was made September 4th, 1880. The judgment signed on the verdict in the claim case, and approved by Judge Grice, was at August term, 1878. The claim case of Harvey vs. Freeman, trustee, was carried by bill of exceptions to the supreme court, and there dismissed, affirming the judgment of the court below. Upon the trial of the illegality before Judge Lawson, in September, 1880, the plaintiff in fi.fa., in order to show that the construction of the verdict rendered as aforesaid was involved in the case that went to the supreme court, and that objections to the verdict could then be made, offered in evidence the bill of exceptions which was filed to the judgment of the court in the claim case, and which was dismissed, as before stated, affirming the judgment of the court in 1878 The evidence thus offered was rejected by the court, which was error.
The plaintiff in fi. fa. offered in evidence the record of the evidence in the claim case, which resulted in the verdict, to wit, the testimony of Ham, that the half-interest in the house and lot in Forsyth was worth from five to six hundred dollars, and the testimony of R. T. Harvey that "the land in the country levied on is worth from five to six hundred dollars." This evidence was also rejected. The court made the decision on the merits as stated, and plaintiff in error excepted to all this.
The rule, we think, is this: A verdict may be amendedby the court or construed by reference to the pleadings and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haughton v. Judsen, 42972
...not guilty as charged.' The verdict may be construed in the light of the pleadings, the issues made by the evidence and the charge. Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247; Taylor v. Brown, 165 Ga. 698, 700, 141 S.E. 898; Powell v. Moore, 202 Ga. 62, 66, 42 S.E.2d 110. A verdict is certain which can be ......
-
Merch.S' Grocery Co v. Albany Hardware & Mill Supply Co
...construction" (Civil Code 1910, § 5927), and are to be construed in the light of the pleadings and the issues made by the evidence. Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247; Seifert v. Holt, 82 Ga. 757, 9 S. E. 843; David v. Tucker, 140 Ga. 240, 78 S. E. 909; Tifton, etc., Railway Co. v. Butler, 4 Ga. Ap......
-
Jackson v. Riviera Development Corp., 48700
...an affirmative reply. The verdict may be construed in the light of the pleadings, the issues made by the evidence and the charge. Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247; Taylor v. Brown, 165 Ga. 698, 700, 141 S.E. 898; Powell v. Moore, 202 Ga. 62, 66, 42 S.E.2d 110. In Haughton v. Judsen, 116 Ga.App. 3......
-
Jolly v. Jolly
...explicit as to preclude a consideration of the pleadings and the evidence in construing the verdict. Giles v. Spinks, 64 Ga. 205; Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247(1); Seifert v. Holt, 82 Ga. 757, 9 S.E. 843; Short v. Cofer, 161 Ga. 587(1), 131 S.E. 362; Jones v. Empire Furniture Co., 40 Ga.App. 5......