Case Name: BRINSON v. REID
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1899-04-20
Citations: 107 Ga. 250
Docket Number: 
Parties: BRINSON v. REID.
Judges: All the Justices concurring, -
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 107
Pages: 250–251

Head Matter:
BRINSON v. REID.
Even if the charge excepted to was not an accurate statement of the law applicable, it is manifest that it caused no injury to the losing party; and the verdict rendered in the city court being one of which he had no just cause to complain, save as to a single error therein which the superior-court corrected, its judgment overruling the certiorari and charging the-defendant therein with the costs will not he disturbed.
Argued March 21,
Decided April 20, 1899.
Certiorari. Before Judge Hutchins. Clarke superior court.. April term, 1898.
H. C. Tuck, for plaintiff in error.
John J. Strickland, contra..

Opinion:
Lumpkin, P. J.
This was an action in the city court of Athens, by the guest of a hotel against the proprietor of the same, for the value of lost baggage. The plaintiff had a recovery of $125.00 as principal and $5.00 as interest. Thereupon the defendant filed a petition for certiorari, alleging error in the charge of the court, and complaining of the verdict as excessive. In the superior court a judgment was rendered overruling the certiorari on condition that the plaintiff in the court below would write off from his verdict the sum named therein as interest, and adjudging him liable for the costs of the certiorari. The interest was written off, and the defendant's bill of exceptions alleges error in not sustaining the certiorari generally.
It may be that the judge of the city court stated to the jury too strongly against the defendant the law regulating the liability of innkeepers. It is, however, unnecessary to determine whether or not error in this respect was committed; for the charge, even if incorrect, could have had no bearing whatever upon the question of amount, and the evidence fully warranted a finding in the plaintiff's favor of at least $125.00. The item of the verdict relating to interest was unlawful, but the verdict was cured by the order directing the interest to be written off. This being so, and the costs of the certiorari having been charged to the defendant in certiorari, who was the plaintiff in the original action, the defendant therein has no just cause for complaining of the judgment rendered in the superior court.
Judgment affirmed.
All the Justices concurring, -