Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907

Hicks v. Hill

Hicks v. Hill
Supreme Court of Georgia · Decided June 13, 1907 · Lumpkin
128 Ga. 464; 57 S.E. 761; 1907 Ga. LEXIS 141

Counsel

J. B. Jones "and McMillan & Erwin, for plaintiff in error.

Hicks v. Hill

Opinion of the Court

Lumpkin, J.

The evidence in this ease was sufficient to sustain a recovery. The amount, however, was larger than the evidence authorized. The plaintiff could not recover more than .he had been caused to pay out by reason of the representations and conduct of the defendant, and interest-at seven per cent, thereon. The only evidence on that subject was that-he paid “$175.00 and the interest.” When the payment was made, or how much interest was paid, does not appear. If the plaintiff will write off from the recovery all in excess of $175, and seven per cent, interest from the date of the filing of the suit, the verdict may stand. Otherwise a new trial will be granted. c

Judgment affirmed on terms.

All the Justices concur. J. B. Jones "and McMillan & Erwin, for plaintiff in error.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.