James Hilburn Francis appeals from entry of judgment on a directed verdict for Raleigh J. Cook denying specific performance of an option to purchase land. We reverse.
Cook as defendant moved for a directed verdict at the close of the case-in-chief of the plaintiff Francis. The trial court sustained the motion on the basis that Francis had not proven the value of the optioned land.
1. The trial court erred by construing the testimony of Francis, the respondent to the motion for directed verdict, most strongly against him. The evidence should have been “considered in the light most favorable to the respondent to the motion.”
Burney v. Butler,
2. Construed favorably to Francis, the evidence shows that Francis had purchased other tracts or parcels of land near or around the tract under option. He felt reasonably sure that the $300 per acre that Cook had asked for the 91.1 acres he had purchased from Cook and for the 13.1 acres covered by the option was the full and fair value *226 of the land. This evidence was not excludable. Code Ann. § 38-1709. It was legally sufficient to preclude grant of the motion for directed verdict. North Ga. Production Credit Assn. v. Vandergrift, supra.
Our decision in
Jones v. Dallas,
The trial court should not have granted the motion for directed verdict.
Judgment reversed.
