Swain v. Georgia Power & Light Co.
| Decision Date | 03 May 1933 |
| Docket Number | 22685. |
| Citation | 169 S.E. 249,46 Ga.App. 794 |
| Parties | SWAIN v. GEORGIA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
Presumptions favor validity of jury verdict, and, if possible construction upholding verdict will be adopted (Civ. Code 1910, § 5927).
Verdict is certain which can be made certain by what it contains itself or by record (Civ. Code 1910, § 5927).
Where verdict may, by reasonable construction, be understood, and legal judgment entered thereon, it is sufficient (Civ. Code 1910, § 5927).
Verdicts are construable in light of pleadings, issues made by evidence, and charge (Civ. Code 1910, § 5927).
Verdict in condemnation proceeding finding for condemnee "$181.12 on 22 acres," followed by foreman's signature, whereunder was statement that jury found for condemnee "as to the timber on the 113 acres $118.88," followed by foreman's signature held not void, when construed with evidence and charge (Civ. Code 1910, § 5927).
Evidence disclosed that 113 acres of the land involved had been theretofore acquired by the condemnor for the purpose of inundation, but not for deforestation, and that in the proceeding in question the condemnor sought only the right of deforestation as to the 113-acre tract, and that condemnor sought to condemn the remaining 22 acres belonging to condemnee for both inundation and deforestation, and the court charged the jury to bring in their verdict with reference to each parcel of the land separately, finding as to the timber on the larger tract and as to the damages from inundation and deforestation on the smaller tract.
In condemnation proceeding, cross-examining condemnee as to whether, in estimating value of land, he considered fact that condemnor had previously condemned portion thereof for inundation, held not error.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation, evidence that condemnor's employees had agreed that condemnee have timber, and that condemnor had refused to let condemnee have timber, held not admissible to show value of timber.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation, testimony of certain witness as to value of timber held harmless to condemnee, where jury found much higher valuation.
Where arbitrators in proceeding to condemn land for deforestation examined land and timber, their opinions regarding value thereof were admissible, notwithstanding award, showing arbitrators' finding as to value, was in record and part of pleadings.
Arbitrators in proceeding to condemn land for deforestation could properly testify that, in estimating value of premises and timber, they considered that part of premises had already been taken for inundation purposes and condemnee compensated therefor.
In proceeding to condemn for deforestation land previously condemned for inundation, check which condemnee had been paid for dead timber on land after condemnor had flooded it held admissible.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation, previous condemnation suits for damages for impounding water and deadening timber on, and selling timber from, land in controversy, resulting in settlements, held admissible on issue of present value of timber on premises condemned.
In condemnation proceeding, health officer's testimony that backwater with logs and brush floating in it was conducive to breeding of mosquitoes held admissible to show that condemnor did not wantonly destroy timber by removing it from water.
In proceeding to condemn for deforestation land previously condemned for inundation, cross-examining condemnee regarding whether he received $1,500 from condemnor for damages to land and for damages for deadening of timber caused by flooding thereof held not error.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation, condemnee's lease of land involved to power company for inundation held admissible to show that right to flood tract had passed out of condemnee, but not title to timber.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation, charging jury to consider, in arriving at damages, that condemnor had previously acquired right to inundate land involved and had compensated condemnee therefor, held not error.
In proceeding to condemn land for deforestation and inundation charging jury to bring in verdict in two parts, one showing value of timber on tract previously condemned for inundation, and second showing value of remainder as to timber and for inundation purposes, held proper.
In condemnation proceeding, charge that condemnee held fee-simple title, subject to easements granted, held applicable and not misleading or confusing.
$118.88 damages to condemnee for condemnation for deforestation of 113 acres, and $181.12 for damages from condemnation of 22 acres for inundation and deforestation, held warranted.
Error from Superior Court, Decatur County; B. C. Gardner, Judge.
Condemnation proceedings by the Georgia Power & Light Company against W. C. Swain. To review the judgment, after his motion for a new trial was overruled, condemnee brings error.
Affirmed.
Verdicts are construable in light of pleadings, issues and charge (Civ.Code 1910, § 5927).
The Georgia Power & Light Company instituted proceedings to condemn an easement to flow back water upon and inundate 136.52 acres of W. C. Swain, including the right to deforest the same. An appraiser was selected by the condemnor and one by the condemnee, and these two selected a third. From their award the condemnee appealed to the superior court. On the trial it appeared that a part of the land, to wit, 113.88 acres, had been theretofore acquired by the condemnor for the purpose of inundation, but not for deforestation, and that in the present proceeding the condemnor sought only the right to deforest the 113-acre tract, and that as to the remaining 22.64 acres it sought both the right to inundate and to deforest. The court instructed the jury to bring in their verdict with reference to each parcel of the land separately, finding as to the timber on the larger tract and as to damages for the right to inundate and deforest the smaller tract. Accordingly, they returned this verdict: "We, the jury, find for the condemnee $181.12 on 22 acres of land." Then followed the signature of the foreman. Thereunder the verdict further read: "We, the jury, find for the condemnee as to the timber on the 113 acres $118.88," and thereunder also appeared the signature of the foreman. The condemnee filed a motion in arrest of judgment, which was overruled, and to this judgment the condemnee excepts. The condemnee filed a motion for new trial on grounds dealt with in the following decision. The court overruled the motion for a new trial, and to this judgment the condemnee excepts.
P. D. Rich, of Bainbridge, for plaintiff in error.
A. B. Conger, of Bainbridge, for defendant in error.
Syllabus OPINION.
1. "Verdicts are to have a reasonable intendment, and are to receive a reasonable construction, and are not to be avoided unless from necessity." Civil Code 1910, § 5927. The presumptions are in favor of the validity of the verdict of a jury, and, if possible, a construction will be given that will uphold it. Southern R. Co. v....
To continue reading
Request your trial