Speth v. Maxwell
65 S.E. 580, 6 Ga. App. 630, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 409
Opinion
Under the ruling in Williams v. Inman, (1 Ga. App. 321 2, 3), the plaintiff was entitled to recover actual damages, irrespective of malice or want of probable cause. The questions of malice and want of probable cause should have been submitted to the jury only as to the allowance of exemplary damages in addition to the actual damages which the plaintiff was entitled to recover under the evidence. Consequently, it was error to direct a verdict in favor of the defendant.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Speth v. Maxwell, 65 S.E. 580, 6 Ga. App. 630, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 409 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909).
65 S.E. 580 (Speth v. Maxwell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
C. M. Miller Co. v. Lunceford
186 S.E. 766 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1936)
McCormick v. Tribune-Herald Co.
78 S.E. 779 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1913)
Maxwell v. Speth
72 S.E. 292 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1911)