Hubert v. Fitzpatrick

Supreme Court of Georgia

Hubert v. Fitzpatrick

84 S.E.2d 62, 211 Ga. 132, 1954 Ga. LEXIS 504

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedSeptember 13, 1954

Docket18668

StatusPublished

This text of 84 S.E.2d 62 (Hubert v. Fitzpatrick) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hubert v. Fitzpatrick, 84 S.E.2d 62, 211 Ga. 132, 1954 Ga. LEXIS 504 (Ga. 1954).

Pincite

Opinions

Candler, Justice.

In this litigation the plaintiff alleged in her petition that the defendants had committed several specified acts of trespass on her home property, wilfully and maliciously, from which injury and damage resulted to her. She prayed for damages, actual and punitive, and for an injunction to prevent the commission of further similar acts of trespass by the defendants. A verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $7.50 as actual damages and $250 as general or punitive damages was returned by the jury. The defendants moved for a new trial, basing their motion on the usual general grounds only. Their motion was denied and the exception is to that judgment. Held:

There being no exception to any ruling of the court pending the trial, and the evidence being sufficient to authorize the verdict; the judgment excepted to is not erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., who dissents.

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

Candler, Justice.

In this litigation the plaintiff alleged in her petition that the defendants had committed several specified acts of trespass on her home property, wilfully and maliciously, from which injury and damage resulted to her. She prayed for damages, actual and punitive, and for an injunction to prevent the commission of further similar acts of trespass by the defendants. A verdict in favor of the plaintiff for $7.50 as actual damages and $250 as general or punitive damages was returned by the jury. The defendants moved for a new trial, basing their motion on the usual general grounds only. Their motion was denied and the exception is to that judgment. Held:

There being no exception to any ruling of the court pending the trial, and the evidence being sufficient to authorize the verdict; the judgment excepted to is not erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Wyatt, P. J., who dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 S.E.2d 62, 211 Ga. 132, 1954 Ga. LEXIS 504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hubert-v-fitzpatrick-ga-1954.