Trans-Southern Life v. Johnson, TRANS-SOUTHERN
Citation | 254 So.2d 321,287 Ala. 620 |
Decision Date | 04 November 1971 |
Docket Number | 8 Div. 395,TRANS-SOUTHERN |
Parties | LIFE, a Corp. v. Robert C. JOHNSON. |
Court | Supreme Court of Alabama |
John S. Bowman, Charles M. Crook, Montgomery, for appellant.
Hobart A. McWhorter, Jr., Birmingham, Ralph Ford, Huntsville, for appellee.
Appellee sued appellant and received judgment for $22,662.28 for damages arising out of the wrongful termination of appellee's employment under a written contract with appellant.
The written contract was made a part of the complaint. It provided that the plaintiff was to receive as salary $15,000 per year, plus two and one-half percent commissions of first year annual premiums for any and all classes of life insurance received from any source by the employer, and that if the plaintiff were discharged by the employer, the employer would pay to him 3/4 of the remaining unearned salary in a lump sum and 100% Of all commissions as contracted for the remainder of the three year period of the contract.
The contract was to extend for a period of three years from January 1, 1967. The plaintiff was discharged on June 28, 1968. He claimed damages based on 3/4 of the unearned salary as provided for in the contract and two and one-half percent as commissions on premiums paid on defendant's life insurance business through, towit, December 31, 1969.
Appellant makes 10 assignments of error, but concedes in brief that this appeal is limited to the question of whether or not the lower court erred in denying defendant's motion for a new trial 'in that the judgment was excessive' (Assignments of error 1, 2, 3, 4) in that it allowed the plaintiff to adduce testimony relating to 'projected earnings of the defendant' (Assignments of error 5, 6, 7, 8). Assignments 9 and 10 are not argued.
It is the contention of the appellant that the trial court 'applied an erroneous standard in the assessment of damages so as to result in the award of excessive damages'. To support this position, the appellant says that the trial court obviously allowed the plaintiff to recover an amount of money based upon future earnings of the defendant by way of commission on insurance premiums, i.e., that such premiums were not as yet earned and that therefore should not have been considered in determining the amount of commissions to which the plaintiff was entitled under the contract.
The point made by appellant is that the court erred in that it erroneously allowed evidence to establish an improper element of damage.
At page 78 of the transcript of evidence, the following appears:
'MR. McWHORTER: Your Honor, projection of sales is something done by every single life insurance company in the United States. And it's also pretty well in the province of the Sales Manager to project sales. And I think on that basis he would be qualified to give his opinion.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Faircloth v. LAMB-GRAYS HARBOR COMPANY, INC.
...on the evidence going to the witness' competency will not be disturbed on appeal except for palpable abuse, Trans-Southern Life v. Johnson, 1971, 287 Ala. 620, 254 So.2d 321, 324; Independent Life and Accident Insurance Company of Jacksonville, Florida v. Aaron, 1968, 282 Ala. 685, 213 So.2......
-
Glaze v. Tennyson
...objection will be affirmed on appeal unless the evidence admitted was subject to such specific objection. Trans-Southern Life v. Johnson, 287 Ala. 620, 254 So.2d 321 (1971). Here, that evidence shows that Rains was indeed properly qualified to testify as an expert. Or, putting it differentl......
-
Joe Sartain Ford, Inc. v. American Indem. Co.
...not be disturbed on appeal except for palpable abuse. Maslankowski v. Beam, 288 Ala. 254, 259 So.2d 804 (1972); Trans-Southern Life v. Johnson, 287 Ala. 620, 254 So.2d 321 (1971). We find no abuse of discretion. American's expert was an electrical engineer. His firm was engaged in the busin......
-
Glover v. Liberty Nat. Life Ins. Co.
...of discretion upon the part of the trial judge had he sustained proper objections to the questions set out. Cf. Trans-Southern Life v. Johnson, 287 Ala. 620, 254 So.2d 321 (1971); Glaze v. Tennyson, 352 So.2d 1335 (Ala.1977); Sharp v. Argo-Collier Truck Lines Corp., 356 So.2d 147 (Ala.1978)......