Red v. City Council

25 Ga. 386
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 15, 1858
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 25 Ga. 386 (Red v. City Council) 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
Red v. City Council, 25 Ga. 386 (Ga. 1858).

Opinion

[390]*390 By the Court.

Benning, J.

delivering the opinion.

Was the Court right in overruling the motion for a new-trial ?

All the grounds of that motion, may be considered as included in the first, that the verdict was contrary to the evidence, and to the weight of the evidence.

We do not think this ground well founded.

It is far from clear, that there was ever any contract between the City Council and Red.

At one meeting of the City Council, the motion that Red’s prayer” be granted, was carried by the casting vote of the Mayor.

At the next meeting, this action was reconsidered.

[1.] Now was there a standing rule making the action of the Council subject to reconsideration in this way? No proof on the point is in the record. We are therefore permitted, if we are not required, to presume, -that there was such a rule.

If there was, then the matter of the petition, was still in an unfinished state, notwithstanding the first action of the Council, and the Council had still the right to ratify or reverse that action.

Especially is this so, inasmuch as, the first action of the Council, even if it was ever communicated to Red, did not lead him, as far as appears, to make new investments, or to engage in new operations of any kind.

[2.] But even if there was proof of a contract, and also of a breach of that contract, there was no proof of any damages, except speculative damages” — that is, the loss of conjectural profits, and these are too remote and uncertain to be recoverable. So this Court has held in several cases. Cooper vs. Young, 22 Ga.R. 269. The Coweta Falls Manufacturing Company vs. Rogers, 19 Ga. R. 417.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Related

Davis v. Boyd
162 S.E.2d 880 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Strickland v. Flournoy
97 S.E.2d 638 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Tovell v. Legum
60 S.E.2d 339 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1950)
East Side Lumber & Coal Co. v. Barfield
24 S.E.2d 681 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
Price v. Van Lint
120 P.2d 611 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1941)
Miner v. Graham
3 S.E.2d 211 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Ellerson v. Grove
44 F.2d 493 (Fourth Circuit, 1930)
Jones v. Graham
148 S.E. 604 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1929)
Smalls v. Brennan
80 S.E. 339 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)
State v. Board of Public Service
81 Ohio St. (N.S.) 218 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1909)
Piedmont Wagon Co. v. Hudgens & McIntosh
61 S.E. 835 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Carolina Portland Cement Co. v. Columbia Improvement Co.
60 S.E. 279 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
D. A. Tompkins Co. v. Monticello Cotton Oil Co.
153 F. 817 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Southern District of Georgia, 1907)
Machine Co. v. . Tobacco Co.
53 S.E. 885 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1906)
Central Coal & Coke Co. v. Hartman
111 F. 96 (Eighth Circuit, 1901)
Kenny v. Collier
79 Ga. 743 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1887)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 Ga. 386, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/red-v-city-council-ga-1858.