Minor v. Ray

193 S.E.2d 41, 127 Ga. App. 1, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 754
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 5, 1972
Docket47030
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 193 S.E.2d 41 (Minor v. Ray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Minor v. Ray, 193 S.E.2d 41, 127 Ga. App. 1, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 754 (Ga. Ct. App. 1972).

Opinions

Bell, Chief Judge.

This is the second appearance of this case here. It concerns a dispute over the location of a boundary line. In Minor v. Ray, 122 Ga. App. 531 (177 SE2d 842) we affirmed the verdict and judgment for plaintiffs. Certiorari was denied. 122 Ga. App. 906. Thereafter, the defendant moved to set aside the judgment on the basis of a nonamendable defect which appears on the face of the record or pleadings. CPA § 60 (d) (Code Ann. § 81A-160 (d)). The defect asserted is the jury verdict which reads: "We, the jury, find for the land lot line as contended by the plaintiffs and further find that the same is a line between the parties as contended by the plaintiffs.” The trial court made the verdict the judgment of the court. In the court’s judgment there appears that the jury verdict was one of three possible verdicts stipulated by counsel. In the motion to set aside the defendant asserted a lack of a certain, definite and sufficient description in the verdict, judgment and plaintiffs’ pleadings to identify the premises in controversy. The motion was denied. Held:

[2]*2Argued April 3, 1972 Decided September 5, 1972. H. Thad Crawley, Byrd, Groover & Buford, Garland T. Byrd, for appellant.

A verdict shall have a reasonable intendment, and shall receive a reasonable construction, and shall not be avoided unless from necessity. Code § 110-105. A verdict is certain which can be made certain by what it contains or by the record. Jackson v. Houston, 200 Ga. 399 (37 SE2d 399). The court may construe a verdict, which is not explicit in its terms, in the light of the pleadings, the issues made by the evidence, and the charge. Harvey v. Head, 68 Ga. 247; Taylor v. Brown, 165 Ga. 698, 700 (141 SE 898). The presumptions are in favor of the validity of verdicts, and if possible a construction will be given which will uphold them. Jackson v. Houston, 200 Ga. 399, supra. The defendant in his notice of appeal directed that the clerk omit the transcript of the evidence and exhibits. The plaintiff has asked that we consider the entire record. This we will do, as a court may take judicial notice of its own records in an immediate case before it. Branch v. Branch, 194 Ga. 575 (22 SE2d 124); Roberts v. Roberts, 201 Ga. 357 (39 SE2d 749). By reference to the entire record we see that the plaintiff’s petition contains a claim of ownership as to all of Land Lot 87 in the Sixth Land District of Crawford County, Georgia. An examination of the evidence shows that the verdict expresses with reasonable certainty the intention of the jury to find that the boundary line as between plaintiffs and defendant was as contended by plaintiffs, which location was shown with substantial certainty by the testimony of their witnesses and a surveyor’s plat. Consequently, in light of the pleadings and the evidence as a whole, we cannot say as a matter of law that the verdict is too indefinite and uncertain to be enforced. Powell v. Moore, 202 Ga. 62 (1) (42 SE2d 110).

Judgment affirmed.

Stolz, J., concurs. Evans, J., concurs specially. [3]*3John C. Scarborough, Jr., for appellees.

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

Related

Osburn v. Harbison
333 S.E.2d 429 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Jones v. Spindel
196 S.E.2d 22 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Minor v. Ray
193 S.E.2d 41 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
193 S.E.2d 41, 127 Ga. App. 1, 1972 Ga. App. LEXIS 754, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minor-v-ray-gactapp-1972.