Western & A. R. Co v. Brown

• Decision Date: 21 July 1897
• Citation: 102 Ga. 13,29 S.E. 130
• Parties: WESTERN & A. R. CO. v. BROWN.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

29 S.E. 130

102 Ga. 13

WESTERN & A. R. CO.

v.BROWN.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

July 21, 1897.

Interest — When Allowed — Damaqes — Railroads—Killing Stock—Right to Open and Close.

1. As matter of law, unliquidated demands, arising ex delicto, do not bear interest, and on a suit to recover the value of property which has been injured or destroyed the jury cannot legally find a given amount for principal, with an additional amount as interest.

2. The jury may, in the lawful exercise of their power, add to the value of property destroyed a sum equal to the interest on such value; but such sum must be found and returned as damages, not as interest.

3. In the present case the question of liability was one for the jury, and their verdict is not against the evidence. The charge of the court did not authorize the rendition of a verdict bearing interest on the principal found. The verdict, as corrected, expressed the real finding of the jury, and will not, therefore, be disturbed.

4. There was no error in ruling that the plaintiff had the right to open and conclude, notwithstanding the admission made by the defendant, the same not making out a complete prima facie case for the plaintiff.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Whitfield county; T. W. Milner, Judge.

Action by John B. Brown against the Western & Atlantic Railroad Company. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

The following is the official report:

Brown sued the railroad company for damages alleged to have been sustained by him by reason of the negligent killing of a jennet belonging to him by a locomotive and train of the defendant. The amount sued for was $500. The defendant admitted the killing, but denied that the jennet was worth $500, or any other large sum, and denied that the killing was due to any fault or negligence on the part of the defendant or its servants. There was a verdict for the plaintiff for $108.16 and costs of suit, and, the defendant's motion for a new trial being overruled, It excepted.

The motion for a new trial contained, In addition to the general grounds, the following: The court erred in charging: "If you find under the rules given you that the plaintiff is entitled to recover, you will then, in measuring the damage, find from all the testimony what the jennet was worth at the time she was killed; and to this amount you may, if you see fit, add Interest up to the present time." The court erred in the following ruling: When the jury returned with their verdict, it was substantially In this form: "We, the jury, find for the plaintiff $100 principal, and eight dollars and sixteen and two-thirds cents interest;" when counsel for plaintiff moved the court to be allowed to consolidate the two In one lump sum, which the court, over the objection of defendant's counsel, allowed done. Movant specifies as error in the foregoing charge of the court and in the action of the court in receiving the verdict that in an action for unliquidated damages no Interest is allowed, nor has the court power to receive a verdict which has been Increased by the addition of Interest. The court erred in ruling that plaintiff was entitled to the opening and conclusion, defendant's attorneys stating to the court, before the argument began, that defendant admitted the killing, and the law then implied negligence, which made a prima facie case for recovery.

Payne & Tye and R. J. & J. McCamy, for plaintiff in error.

McCutchen & Shumate and Shumate & Maddox, for defendant in error.

LITTLE, J. The official report states the facts.

1. It is not necessary to cite authorities for the proposition that, as a matter of law, unliquidated demands arising ex delicto do not bear interest. Our Code (section 3800) provides that "in all cases where an amount ascertained would be the damages at the time of the breach, it may be increased by the addition of legal interest from that time till the recovery." This provision applies in a suit...