Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Brewton

• Decision Date: 24 February 1920
• Docket Number: 1481.
• Citation: 102 S.E. 439,150 Ga. 37
• Parties: SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. v. BREWTON.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

102 S.E. 439

150 Ga. 37

SEABOARD AIR LINE RY. v. BREWTON.

No. 1481.

Supreme Court of Georgia

February 24, 1920

Syllabus by the Court.

Rule 2 adopted by the Supreme Court, as to the manner of taking cases from the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court by writ of certiorari (146 Ga. 840, 91 S.E. vi), provides, among other things: "Notice of the date of the filing of the petition, together with a copy of the petition, and brief, if any, in support of the same, shall be served on counsel for the respondent within three days after such date." Held, that the petition for certiorari in this case is not subject to dismissal on the ground that the plaintiff in error "failed to serve defendant in error with any brief or argument, or copy of same, to be presented in said case, as required by said rule." Moreover, the petition itself fully set forth the grounds for certiorari and the authorities relied on to sustain them, and was duly served on the respondent.

In an action for damages based on personal injuries, where under the pleadings and the evidence there was an issue whether the injuries were permanent or temporary in character, and the judge instructed the jury relatively to the measure of damages applicable to a case where the injury was permanent but omitted to give instructions as to the measure of damages that would be applicable if the injury were not permanent such omission, even without proper request for charge, would be cause for reversal. Central Railroad, etc., Co. v Dottenheim, 92 Ga. 425, 17 S.E. 662; Central of Ga Ry. Co. v. Johnston, 106 Ga. 139, 32 S.E. 78; Southern Ry. Co. v. O'Bryan, 112 Ga. 127, 37 S.E. 161; Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Smith, 145 Ga. 276, 88 S.E. 983; A., B. & A. Ry. Co. v Barnwell, 138 Ga. 569, 75 S.E. 645; Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Knight, 142 Ga. 801, 83 S.E. 943; Western & Atlantic R. Co. v. Roberts, 144 Ga. 250, 86 S.E. 933. In the first four of the cases just cited the motions for new trial expressly alleged that the damages were excessive, but the rulings made did not in any wise refer to that fact. In the last four cases, where similar rulings were made, the motions for new trial did not allege that the damages were excessive.

In Central Railroad v. Harris, 76 Ga. 501 (only two of the three justices presiding), it was said: "No complaint of excessive damages is made, and therefore it is immaterial what measured them." This ruling has been followed and applied by the Court of Appeals in the following cases ...