lawskills
Loading
Did you know you can download our entire database for free?


Resources
[more] 

Georgia Caselaw:
Browse
Greatest Hits

Georgia Code: Browse

(external) Findlaw Georgia Law Resources


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Lawskills.com Georgia Caselaw
PROFESSIONAL INSURANCE SERVICES, INC. v. SIZEMORE ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.
77088.
MCMURRAY, Presiding Judge.
Action on account. DeKalb State Court. Before Judge Smith.
Plaintiff Professional Insurance Services, Inc., brought this suit on open account against Sizemore Electric Company, Inc. It contended that defendant was indebted to it in the amount of $8,429.57 and that that sum represented the balance due for the provisions of various insurance coverages.
At trial, plaintiff's president testified that the balance shown on plaintiff's ledger sheet, $8,429.57, accurately reflected the amount of defendant's indebtedness to plaintiff. No objection was made with respect to this oral evidence.
Plaintiff did not introduce its ledger sheet or any other documents into evidence and, at the close of plaintiff's case, defendant moved for a directed verdict. The trial court granted the motion, ruling that plaintiff failed to make out a prima facie case since it did not introduce documentary evidence reflecting the balance due. The jury obligingly returned a verdict in favor of defendant. Judgment was entered accordingly and plaintiff appealed. Held:
1. If there is "any evidence" creating a material issue of fact, a motion for a directed verdict cannot be granted. Little v. Little, 173 Ga. App. 116 (325 SE2d 624); OCGA 9-11-50 (a). Was "any evidence" creating a material issue of fact introduced in the case sub judice? Yes, it was.
In the case sub judice, oral evidence concerning the amount of defendant's indebtedness to plaintiff was introduced without objection. This evidence made out a prima facie case and it was not necessary for plaintiff to introduce other documents reflecting the balance due in order to prevail against defendant's motion for a directed verdict. Thomas &c. Lumber Co. v. Atlantic Mill &c. Co., 24 Ga. App. 749 (2), supra. Compare Wolfe v. Brown-Wright &c. Corp., 87 Ga. App. 12, 14 (73 SE2d 82). It follows that the trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for a directed verdict.
2. The remaining enumerations of error are either moot or without merit.
John L. Blandford, for appellee.
Billy R. Smith, for appellant.
DECIDED SEPTEMBER 20, 1988.
Thursday May 21 12:49 EDT


This site exists because of donors like you.

Thanks!


Valid HTML 4.0!

Valid CSS!





Home - Tour - Disclaimer - Privacy - Contact Us
Copyright © 2000,2002,2004 Lawskills.com