17186 | Ga. Ct. App. | May 12, 1926
The evidence introduced for the plaintiff showed that he had a valid mortgage-note on three mules to secure a debt due him by the mortgagor for supplies; that the defendant, after reading over the mortgage-note one afternoon, caused the mules to be carried away the same night and conveyed into another State; that foreclosure proceedings were
1. If one having actual knowledge that another has a mortgage on personal property wilfully conveys the property beyond the limits of this State and destroys the value of the mortgage, he is liable in damages to the mortgagee; and the measure of damages is the value of the property, not exceeding the amount due upon the mortgage. Harris v. Grant, 96 Ga. 211 (23 S.E. 390" court="Ga." date_filed="1895-05-13" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/harris-v-grant-5566220?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="5566220">23 S. E. 390); DeVaughn v. Harris, 103 Ga. 102 (29 S. E. 613); Reid v. Matthews, 102 Ga. 189 (29 S.E. 173" court="Ga." date_filed="1897-08-05" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/reid-v-matthews-5567760?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="5567760">29 S. E. 173, 66 Am. St. R. 164); Todd v. Hurst Supply Co., 17 Ga. App. 98 (86 S.E. 255" court="Ga. Ct. App." date_filed="1915-09-17" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/todd-v-hurst-supply-co-5607937?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="5607937">86 S. E. 255).
2. The defendant offered no evidence, there was no evidence to support the verdict for him, and the court erred in refusing to grant a new trial.
Judgment reversed.