From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Turk v. Jackson Electric Membership Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 12, 1968
161 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)

Opinion

43569, 43570.

SUBMITTED APRIL 2, 1968.

DECIDED APRIL 12, 1968.

Action for damages. Hall Superior Court. Before Judge Kenyon.

C. Winfred Smith, for appellant.

Kenyon, Gunter, Hulsey Sims, Edgar H. Sims, Jr., for appellee.


1. Plaintiff brought this action to recover for damage to his automobile occasioned when it struck a low-hanging electric power line belonging to defendant. On trial of the case, the only evidence of the amount of damages was plaintiff's testimony that another person had estimated it would cost $150 to repair the car, that the fair market value of the car before striking the power line was $400 and that the fair market value afterwards was $250. Plaintiff gave no reasons on which his opinions of value were based and there was no foundation evidence showing that plaintiff had had an opportunity to form correct opinions. Defendant moved for a directed verdict on the single ground that there was no competent evidence as to the amount of damages. The court refusing to direct a verdict, the jury found for plaintiff. Thereafter the court granted defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, reciting in the judgment that it was based on the absence of any evidence of defendant's negligence. As plaintiff's opinions on the value of the car were entirely without probative value, under the decision of this court in Hoard v. Wiley, 113 Ga. App. 328, 332-333 ( 147 S.E.2d 782), it was not error to grant defendant's motion for judgment n.o.v. See also Nail v. Hiers, 116 Ga. App. 522 (1) ( 157 S.E. 771); Harper v. Harper, 220 Ga. 770, 771 ( 141 S.E.2d 403). The reason assigned by the trial judge for granting the judgment n.o.v. was an incorrect one, since that reason was not included as a ground of defendant's motion for directed verdict. Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 656, as amended ( Code Ann. § 81A-150 (a, b)). But that judgment, being a correct one, will be affirmed although based on an erroneous reason. Jones v. Trussell, 221 Ga. 271, 273 ( 144 S.E.2d 344).

2. The cross appeal, complaining merely of the reason on which the trial court's judgment was based, will be dismissed. Jones v. Trussell, 221 Ga. 271, 273, supra.

Judgment affirmed on the main appeal; cross appeal dismissed. Hall and Quillian, JJ., concur.

SUBMITTED APRIL 2, 1968 — DECIDED APRIL 12, 1968.


Summaries of

Turk v. Jackson Electric Membership Corp.

Court of Appeals of Georgia
Apr 12, 1968
161 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
Case details for

Turk v. Jackson Electric Membership Corp.

Case Details

Full title:TURK v. JACKSON ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION; and vice vera

Court:Court of Appeals of Georgia

Date published: Apr 12, 1968

Citations

161 S.E.2d 430 (Ga. Ct. App. 1968)
161 S.E.2d 430

Citing Cases

Nelson v. Cheek

In our opinion, though weak, this evidence was sufficient to go to the jury on the question of value of the…

Western Geophysical Co. v. Rowell

We reverse. While it has been held that evidence of value is not to be excluded merely because the valuation…