Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Benton

Supreme Court of Georgia

Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Benton

45 S.E. 70, 117 Ga. 785, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 335

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 26, 1903·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Candler, J.

1. The evidence did not warrant a finding against the defendant for punitive damages; and therefore a charge which in effect instructed the jury that they were authorized to find such damages was erroneous.

2. This not being a case where the entire injury sued for was to the peace and happiness of the plaintiff, it was erroneous to instruct the jury that they might take into consideration the worldly circumstances of the parties a.nd the amount of had faith in the transaction. Central R. Co. v. Almand, 116 Ga. 780. Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Joseph B. & Bryan Gumming and James B. Bark, for plaintiff in error. James Davison, contra.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Candler, J.

1. The evidence did not warrant a finding against the defendant for punitive damages; and therefore a charge which in effect instructed the jury that they were authorized to find such damages was erroneous.

2. This not being a case where the entire injury sued for was to the peace and happiness of the plaintiff, it was erroneous to instruct the jury that they might take into consideration the worldly circumstances of the parties a.nd the amount of had faith in the transaction. Central R. Co. v. Almand, 116 Ga. 780. Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur. Joseph B. & Bryan Gumming and James B. Bark, for plaintiff in error. James Davison, contra.

Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Benton, 45 S.E. 70, 117 Ga. 785, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 335 (Ga. 1903).

Pincite

45 S.E. 70 (Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. Benton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related