Norris v. Winn

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Norris v. Winn

177 S.E. 86, 50 Ga. App. 126, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 652

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 12, 1934

Docket23913

StatusPublished

This text of 177 S.E. 86 (Norris v. Winn) 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

Norris v. Winn, 177 S.E. 86, 50 Ga. App. 126, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 652 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Sutton, J.

Plaintiff, as transferee of a bill of sale to personalty to secure a debt, foreclosed it as a chattel mortgage. The defendant filed her affidavit denying indebtedness and alleging that the [127]*127plaintiff was indebted to her, and prayed for judgment against the plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount sued for. The defendant moved for a new trial, the motion was overruled, and to this judgment she. excepted.

The jury having found for the plaintiff, and their verdict being amply authorized by the evidence, a new trial is not required by the omission to charge the jury that if they found that the plaintiff did not owe the defendant anything under her counterclaim, and also that the defendant did not owe the plaintiff any amount, the form of their verdict should be, “We, the jury, find for the defendant,” there being no request therefor by the defendant. By finding for the plaintiff, the jury found against all the pleas of the defendant. Central Railroad v. Freeman, 75 Ga. 331.

It follows that the court did not err in overruling defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Sutton, J.

Plaintiff, as transferee of a bill of sale to personalty to secure a debt, foreclosed it as a chattel mortgage. The defendant filed her affidavit denying indebtedness and alleging that the [127]*127plaintiff was indebted to her, and prayed for judgment against the plaintiff. The jury returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount sued for. The defendant moved for a new trial, the motion was overruled, and to this judgment she. excepted.

The jury having found for the plaintiff, and their verdict being amply authorized by the evidence, a new trial is not required by the omission to charge the jury that if they found that the plaintiff did not owe the defendant anything under her counterclaim, and also that the defendant did not owe the plaintiff any amount, the form of their verdict should be, “We, the jury, find for the defendant,” there being no request therefor by the defendant. By finding for the plaintiff, the jury found against all the pleas of the defendant. Central Railroad v. Freeman, 75 Ga. 331.

It follows that the court did not err in overruling defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenlcins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

177 S.E. 86, 50 Ga. App. 126, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norris-v-winn-gactapp-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack