Hodsdon v. Whitworth
| Decision Date | 14 March 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 69169,69169 |
| Citation | 328 S.E.2d 753,173 Ga.App. 863 |
| Parties | HODSDON v. WHITWORTH et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Dale Perry, Danielsville, for appellant.
Andrew J. Hill, Jr., Lavonia, James H. Wood, Jefferson, for appellees.
After having been tried three times, the plaintiff once again brings this case before this court for resolution. In our previous decisions, we ruled that as a result of the defendant's actions, the plaintiff was subjected to a wrongful foreclosure. Hodsdon v. Whitworth, 153 Ga.App. 783, 787, 266 S.E.2d 561. See also Hodsdon v. Whitworth, 162 Ga.App. 793, 293 S.E.2d 70.
In plaintiff's complaint he is seeking general damages, punitive damages and attorney fees based upon various causes of action derived from the wrongful foreclosure. After the third trial, the jury awarded plaintiff no general or punitive damages, but it did award him $7,500 as attorney fees. From this verdict the plaintiff appeals. Held:
1. In his first enumeration of error the plaintiff argues that the trial court erred in overruling his motion for new trial because the verdict was contrary to the evidence and contrary to law.
After a careful review of the record, we find no evidence which required the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff for general or punitive damages. Plaintiff contends the verdict was contrary to the law because he was entitled to nominal damages. We recognize that the law infers some damages from the invasion of a property right and if no evidence is given of any particular amount of loss, declares this right by what is termed nominal damages. OCGA § 51-12-4; Ga. Power Co. v. Womble, 150 Ga.App. 28, 32, 256 S.E.2d 640. However, we find the plaintiff's contention to be without merit as this court has held that a new trial will not be ordered simply to allow the plaintiff to present a question for the jury as to nominal damages. Addington v. Western & Atlantic R. Co., 93 Ga. 566, 569, 20 S.E. 71; Corrosion Control, Inc. v. William Armstrong Smith Co., 157 Ga.App. 291, 293, 277 S.E.2d 287. Therefore, in the case sub judice, since a verdict for nominal damages was authorized but not demanded, a reversal of the judgment because of the jury's verdict is not mandated.
We acknowledge the jury's verdict may be inconsistent because it awarded attorney fees to plaintiff and if the defendant had cross-appealed based on the jury's verdict awarding the plaintiff attorney fees, we would be compelled to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Zhong v. PNC Bank, N.A.
...damages. Nominal damages are available to a successful plaintiff in a wrongful foreclosure case. See Hodsdon v. Whitworth , 173 Ga. App. 863, 864 (1), 328 S.E.2d 753 (1985) (finding, in wrongful foreclosure case, that "a verdict for nominal damages was authorized but not demanded"). See gen......
-
Four Seasons Trucking, Inc. v. Crawford (In re Crawford)
.... . . And the law presumes and infers some damage from the invasion of a property right."). But see Hodson v. Whitworth, 173 Ga. App. 863, 864, 328 S.E.2d 753, 754 (1985) (Evidence authorized, but did not demand, verdict for nominal damages, and new trial will not be ordered to allow party ......
-
Lsref2 Baron, LLC v. Alexander SRP Apartments, LLC
...proceed on its claim to recover nominal damages. (LSREF & Hudson Br. Supp. Mot. Summ. J. at 21, Doc. 54–1 (citing Hodsdon v. Whitworth, 173 Ga.App. 863, 328 S.E.2d 753, 754 (1985)).) LSREF and Hudson are correct, however, that Alexander's damages are limited based on the summary judgment re......
-
LSREF2 Baron, LLC v. Alexander SRP Apartments, LLC
...on its claim to recover nominal damages. (LSREF & Hudson Br. Supp. Mot. Summ. J. at 21, Doc. 54–1 (citing Hodsdon v. Whitworth, 173 Ga.App. 863, 328 S.E.2d 753, 754 (1985) ).) LSREF and Hudson are correct, however, that Alexander's damages are limited based on the summary judgment record an......