Tuller v. Carter
| Decision Date | 31 August 1877 |
| Citation | 59 Ga. 395 |
| Parties | William H. Tuller, plaintiff in error. v. Alexander C. Carter,defendant in error. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Trover. Damages. Before Judge Peeples. Fulton Superior Court. October Term, 1876.
Reported in the decision.
E. F. Hoge, for plaintiff in error.
*D. F. & W. R. Hammond, for defendant.
The plaintiff brought his action against the defendant to recover the possession of eleven large diamonds, of the alleged value of one hundred and fifty dollars each, which the plaintiff alleged the defendant had converted to his own use. At the trial, before submitting the case to the jury, the plaintiff elected to take an alternative verdict in damages, to be discharged on delivery of the property sued for, as provided by the 3564th section of the Code. The jury, under the charge of the court, found a verdict for the plaintiff for the sum of $610.00. The defendant made a motion for a new trial on the several grounds therein stated, which was overruled by the court, and the defendant excepted.
1. The court charged the jury, amongst other things, that "if the plaintiff has satisfied you of his right to recover, you will find the proven value of the property sued for at the time of conversion, and add to it interest on the same at seven per cent., and this, when added together, will be the amount of the plaintiff's recovery." This charge of the court was error. By the 3564th section of the Code, it is declared that "It shall be at the option of the plaintiff, in an action to recover personal property, to say, upon the trial thereof, whether he will accept an alternative verdict for the property or its value, or whether he will demand a verdict for the damages alone, or for the property alone, and its hire, if any; and it shall be the duty of the court to instruct the jury to render the verdict as the plaintiff may thus elect." The 3563d section of the Code further declares that, "In an actionof trover, the verdict may be in the alternative—that is, it must be for the value of the property sued for, which may be discharged by the return of the property within a given time specified in the verdict." In this case, the plaintiff elected to take an alternative verdict, and the court should have so instructed the jury as required by the *3564th section of the Code, before cited. The defendant may have desired to return the property sued for, and for that reason may not have contested the value of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bennett v. Pennington, (No. 15235.)
...5930. This was practically held by this court in Bank of La Grange v. Guinn, 26 Ga. App. 411 (1), 106 S. E. 308. See, also, Tuller v. Carter, 59 Ga. 395 (1) (2); O'Neill Mfg. Co. v. Woodley, 118 Ga. 114 (1), 44 S. E. 980; Bank of Blakely v. Cobb, 5 Ga. App. 289, 63 S. E. 24; Smith v. Duke, ......
-
Bennett v. Tucker & Pennington
...5930. This was practically held by this court in Bank of La Grange v. Guinn, 26 Ga.App. 411 (1), 106 S.E. 308. See, also, Tuller v. Carter, 59 Ga. 395 (1) (2); O'Neill Mfg. Co. v. Woodley, 118 Ga. 114 (1), S.E. 980; Bank of Blakely v. Cobb, 5 Ga.App. 289, 63 S.E. 24; Smith v. Duke, 6 Ga.App......
-
Parks v. Parks, 34968
...cited by the plaintiff as follows: Jaques v. Stewart, supra; Dunn v. Young, 22 Ga.App. 17, 95 S.E. 374; Beaver v. Magid, supra and Tuller v. Carter, 59 Ga. 395. We find no reversible error in these two special 3. Special grounds 3 and 4 deal with the verdict of the jury, that 'We, the jury,......
-
Beaver v. Magid
... ... damages, and to be so included in the lump sum. Schley v ... Lyon and Rutherford, 6 Ga. 530, 535; Tuller v ... Carter, 59 Ga. 395(2); Midville, S. & R. B. R. Co ... v. Bruhl, 117 Ga. 329(2), 43 S.E. 717; Dunn v ... Young, 22 Ga.App. 17, 19, 95 ... ...