Opinion ID: 1740368
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: on appellee's motion to correct judgment

Text: As stated in the opinion heretofore rendered, the declaration in this case consisted of 20 counts. Counts 1 to 16 inclusive and 19 and 20 related to acts committed by Mattingly, while counts 17 and 18 related to acts committed by George Faye Vassey, it being alleged in both instances that these men were agents and servants of the defendant Blaine. At the conclusion of the evidence for the plaintiff, the court sustained a directed verdict for the defendant. For the reasons stated in the opinion, the court held that the defendant was not liable for the acts of Mattingly, and that a peremptory instruction, limited to those counts, would have been properly sustained; but that the same was improperly granted as to the acts of Vassey, namely, counts 17 and 18. The appellee has filed a motion to correct the judgment of this Court so as to affirm the judgment of the lower court insofar as it applies to counts 1 through 16 and 19 and 20, and reverse and remand only as to counts 17 and 18, pointing out that the causes alleged in the several counts were separable. Rule 12 of this Court provides as follows: New Trial as to Part. In case a judgment is reversed, and a new trial granted, it shall be only a new trial of the question or questions with respect to which the verdict or decision is found to be wrong, if separable. 5B C.J.S., Appeal and Error, Section 1915, pp. 405-6, provides in part as follows: Although piece-meal reversals are not favored, and an appellate court desiring to affirm in part and reverse in part should make such intention clear and distinct, where a judgment appealed from consists of distinct and independent matters, so that an erroneous portion thereof can be segregated from the parts that are correct, the court will not set aside the entire judgment, but only so much as is erroneous, leaving the residue undisturbed. Where the judgment is entire and indivisible, however, it cannot be reversed in part and affirmed in part, and if there is reversible error therein, it must be set aside in toto. Section 1916, p. 407, of that text provides as follows: Where plaintiff in his pleading sets up several counts or several causes of action and error is committed as to only part of them, the judgment, if capable of separation, should be affirmed in part and reversed in part. On the other hand, where the issue or count infected by error cannot be segregated, the judgment will be reversed in toto. The several counts alleged complete and different causes of action and were susceptible of separation without injury or prejudice. (Hn 13) Consequently, the motion to correct is therefore sustained; and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed as to counts 1 through 16 and also as to 19 and 20, but the same is reversed and the cause is remanded as to counts 17 and 18, being the acts alleged to have been committed by Vassey. Motion to correct judgment is sustained.