Simonton v. Sauls

• Decision Date: 13 June 1946
• Docket Number: No. 31238.,31238.
• Parties: SIMONTON. v. SAULS.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

38 S.E.2d 632

SIMONTON.

v.SAULS.

No. 31238.

Court of Appeals of Georgia,

Division No. 1.

June 13, 1946.

Error from Superior Court, Barrow County; Clifford Pratt, Judge.

Suit by Jurelle Sauls against Odessa Simonton to recover damages for alleged assault and battery, wherein defendant filed a cross-action for damages for an assault and battery allegedly committed upon the person of defendant by plaintiff. Verdict for plaintiff, defendant's amended motion for a new trial overruled, and defendant brings error.

Judgment affirmed.

G. A. Johns, of Winder, and Marvin A. Allison, of Lawrenceville, for plaintiff in error.

Joseph D. Quillian, of Winder, for defendant in error.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

GARDNER, Judge.

1. Mrs. Jurelle Sauls, whom we shall call the plaintiff, brought suit against Mrs. Odessa Simonton, whom we shall call the defendant, for the recovery of damages for an alleged assault and battery which the defendant unjustifiably committed upon the person of the plaintiff. The defendant answered, denying liability to the plaintiff. She also, in the nature of a cross-action, sought recovery for damages against the plaintiff for alleged physical injuries inflicted upon the defendant by an unjustified alleged assault and battery. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant filed an amended motion for a new trial, which the trial court overruled. Error is assigned here on this judgment. The trial was somewhat lengthy. The brief of evidence consists of approximately 66 pages. The evidence is not briefed in accordance with the require-merits. The greater portion of it consists of questions and answers from the transcript. However, we have studied it very carefully. The evidence is in sharp conflict on the material issues. It presents an issue of fact for the exclusive determination of the jury. The issues of fact were by the jury resolved against the defendant. The evidence amply authorized the verdict returned. In addition to the evidence, as to whether the plaintiff or the defendant was justified in the fight between them, appear the evidence of the witnesses who were introduced by the plaintiff as to the reputation for bad character of the defendant and her unworthiness of belief. On this issue the defendant introduced one witness to sustain her good character. The jury were authorized to find that the defendant, without justification, unlawfully attacked and beat the plaintiff, inflicting serious injuries upon the plaintiff. It would serve no good purpose to further detail the evidence here. The assignments of error on the general grounds are without merit.

2. The only special ground assigns error: "Because the court erred in excluding from the consideration of the jury any and all testimony offered tending to show the location of the disputed line between the property of Mrs. Odessa Simonton, the defendant, and Mrs. Jurelle Sauls and her husband * * *." In this ground it is contended (a) "error being in thus excluding this testimony that one of the main contentions of the defendant in...