St. Amour v. Roberts

Court of Appeals of Georgia

St. Amour v. Roberts

318 S.E.2d 313, 170 Ga. App. 717, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 2008

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 23, 1984

Docket67922

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 318 S.E.2d 313 (St. Amour v. Roberts) 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

St. Amour v. Roberts, 318 S.E.2d 313, 170 Ga. App. 717, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 2008 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Pope, Judge.

Donald St. Amour appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial after trial to the court and entry of judgment in favor of appellee H. W. (Bob) Roberts. St. Amour has enumerated two grounds; however, the two are argued together and, in effect, are based on the general grounds as contrary to the law and evidence. Therefore, we will treat the two enumerations together. The action below was for attorney fees owed to Roberts by St. Amour. Roberts testified at length and in some detail as to legal services rendered and their value. The parties stipulated that Roberts’ customary hourly fee was $50 an hour for office work and $100 an hour for court work. St. Amour presented no evidence; indeed, he was not present at trial. *718 The parties, through counsel, waived written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court orally found that Roberts performed legal work for St. Amour and that the fees were reasonable. “A trial judge’s denial of a motion for new trial on evidentiary grounds will be reversed on appeal only if there is no evidence to support the verdict. [Cit.]” Ricketson v. Fox, 247 Ga. 162, 163 (274 SE2d 556) (1981). The same principle applies for findings made by the court sitting without a jury. See Carter v. State, 77 Ga. App. 60 (3) (47 SE2d 815) (1948). We find ample evidence to support the findings and judgment made by the trial court.

Decided April 23, 1984. Alvin N. Siegel, for appellant. Christopher C. Edwards, for appellee.

We see no valid reason for St. Amour to have anticipated reversal of the trial court’s findings and judgment; therefore, we must conclude that the appeal to this court was for the purpose of delay only. Accordingly, we hereby grant Roberts’ motion for damages in the amount of 10 percent of the judgment. See OCGA § 5-6-6.

Judgment affirmed with damages.

Banke, P. J., and Benham, J., concur.

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

Pope, Judge.

Donald St. Amour appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial after trial to the court and entry of judgment in favor of appellee H. W. (Bob) Roberts. St. Amour has enumerated two grounds; however, the two are argued together and, in effect, are based on the general grounds as contrary to the law and evidence. Therefore, we will treat the two enumerations together. The action below was for attorney fees owed to Roberts by St. Amour. Roberts testified at length and in some detail as to legal services rendered and their value. The parties stipulated that Roberts’ customary hourly fee was $50 an hour for office work and $100 an hour for court work. St. Amour presented no evidence; indeed, he was not present at trial. *718 The parties, through counsel, waived written findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court orally found that Roberts performed legal work for St. Amour and that the fees were reasonable. “A trial judge’s denial of a motion for new trial on evidentiary grounds will be reversed on appeal only if there is no evidence to support the verdict. [Cit.]” Ricketson v. Fox, 247 Ga. 162, 163 (274 SE2d 556) (1981). The same principle applies for findings made by the court sitting without a jury. See Carter v. State, 77 Ga. App. 60 (3) (47 SE2d 815) (1948). We find ample evidence to support the findings and judgment made by the trial court.

Decided April 23, 1984. Alvin N. Siegel, for appellant. Christopher C. Edwards, for appellee.

We see no valid reason for St. Amour to have anticipated reversal of the trial court’s findings and judgment; therefore, we must conclude that the appeal to this court was for the purpose of delay only. Accordingly, we hereby grant Roberts’ motion for damages in the amount of 10 percent of the judgment. See OCGA § 5-6-6.

Judgment affirmed with damages.

Banke, P. J., and Benham, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

318 S.E.2d 313, 170 Ga. App. 717, 1984 Ga. App. LEXIS 2008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-amour-v-roberts-gactapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack