Sammons v. Wilson
This text of 92 S.E. 950 (Sammons v. Wilson) 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.
Opinion
1. In a suit for slander, where only general damages were asked, and where no evidence was submitted upon the question of special damages, it was error to charge the jury that “Special damages are such as actually flowed from the act, and must be proved in order to be recovered.”
2. The following charge was likewise error, requiring a reversal; “In all eases necessary expenses consequent upon the injury done are a legitimate. item in the estimate of damages.” No such damages were claimed, and there is not a scintilla of evidence on the subject in the present record. Indeed, neeessáry expenses consequent upon the injury done are legitimate items of damage in personal injury cases only, and the rule is entirely inapplicable in a slander1 suit.
.3. It is unnecessary to make any decision upon assignments of error contained in the several grounds of the motion for new trial not dealt with above, since the errors therein complained of will hardly occur upon another trial of the ease.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
92 S.E. 950, 20 Ga. App. 241, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sammons-v-wilson-gactapp-1917.