*1 38267. HUDSON v. COLE еt al. July Rehearing denied July 15, 28,1960.
Decided *2 A. Parker, Thomas Jr., J. B. McGee, McGee, & Parker plaintiff in error. Sapp, D. C. contra.
Sapp Holton, on the insistence counsel Judge. there no Since Bell, of the ground on general the motion or grounds of repeated rulings this trial, these, motion for new point may we there Also, out, abandoned. are dеemed court, ground go, 4. for con- ground designated then, We special no as grounds, de- remaining special sideration, dirеctly to signated grounds as ground that special designated as 5 contends ground
The jury: giving court erred legal speed State is сharge that limit this hour sunset until one-half m.p.h. hour after from one-half itself correct This in and of is a instruction sunrise.” (b) 2. Code Ann. 68-1626 enunciatiоn of the law. § excerpt charge An court which is correct from the rendered some other essential itself erronеous .because principle is not included therein or added and correct of law the motion for a new trial as case, thereto. such a should es sign charge error on failure of the court the other on the principle sential invоlved and not and correct ground given. 5 will not be considered charge For this 684(6) Gunn, App. 680, Cowart v. this court. 70-207, Code Ann. 2d Also see annotations under E. catchword “Omission.” designated ground assigns error jury: charge jury, “Gentlemen following plaintiff’s would recover, entitled tо pecuniary daughter, interest the life of her
be confined to her plaintiff. or the value of that life to would daughter be rеcover the full value the life of her entitled to necessary expenses other personal without reduction lived.” It is had she . contended that injurious any recovery it to her pecuniary that limits interest in of that plain- of the deceased and the value life to the life tiff, than measure of damages rather the correct which, under Code life 105-1307 and full §§ of the child. further that un- contended principle sound as an abstract of law. While we do clearly first sentence of this it that the plaintiff’s reсovery pe- confined to “her cuniary daughter, interest in the life of her or the value of that plaintiff,” life to it however, is сlear the second sentence stated measure of under Code Ann. 105-1307 and but since the trial §§ expressly did not the attention call to the incoiTect statement, explain them that it could have misled and confused them. A. juiy must take the whole as law, and it is not for them to select *3 between parts conflicting without being by to do instructed so judge. the Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Co. Ga. Andrews, 20 App. 605(1) 261); v. Davis, Strickland 184 Ga. 80(1) (190 E.S. 8 urges that the court erred
in giving the jury: tO' that the burden upon plaintiff prove your to' to satisfac tion by preponderance of the evidence that for which she now claims of the defendant by injuries reason of in flicted at the time testified alleged. about and the manner you Unless satisfied that are she was to by made suffer in question incident by and are satisfiеd her proving to your by preponderance satisfaction you the evidence, should find favor of the defendants.” The contends confusing misleading since plaintiff’s petition no prayer any for recovery plain tiff’s questions Two by raised regard ing charge. Firstly, what by meant the term “suf fer?” urged It court meant mental or physical suffering by the plaintiff, permit re- physical agonies рersonal, by the mother covery her wrongful death of child. Sec- because or financial if the urges that ondly, likewise errоneous loss, financial suffering or some 105-1307 amendment to Code basis dependency or as a requirement of loss p. L. longer mother no exists. incorrect could hold that Again, must it does state jury because misleading to the plaintiff’s right recover to аs to basis particularly minor child. death of her of this noted second instructs to be sentence plaintiff was is satisfied that that unlеss the question, the incident in made to “suffer” word “suffer” has defendants. should find in favor mean- verb, transitive has five variously been defined. As а first of which is: “To to or ings, the and most usual submit imposition, penalty of; or to infliction, be forced to endure like; or the as to severe martyrdom, bear as a victim suffer year’s subjected physical or losses, imprisonment; or a to-be as, pain of; distress; mental endure with suffer feel or insults; keenly acutely; pain thirst or as to suffer body grief Dictionary or New mind.” Webster’s International (1955). lаyman’s customary word, in the sense of Probably mean usually verb “suffer” is most considered to the sub- mental or with jection physical enduring or one grief body or of mind. It is de- suffering pain or also stress or feeling sensation that arises fined as to have like; distressing, or the something painful, from the action of physical. pain, feel or See 83 C. endure J. *4 775-777. assigned legal parlance to the usual in
Considering portion that this “suffer,” impelled verb misleading, to the make the basis of person physical suffering bringing death negli- damages on account action. The action to recover - seeking- an action to recover for gent is not homicide Bell Co., Glawson v. Southern Tel. Tel. Apр. upset emotional person bringing part the action is no measure under Code Ann. 105-1307,which mother father be entitled recоver the full the life which child, full value is defined in Code § and in terms, decisions in thereunder, numerous economic but not terms of If the trial еmotion. here plaintiff, is likewise erroneous, since under the 1952 amendment to Code Ann. § requirement depend- of loss of financial ency as a basis for recovery by mother or father was 1952, p. eliminated. Ga. L.
For stated, overruling the reasons the trial court erred plaintiff’s amended motion for a new of the harmful errors to the as set instructions out in Grounds and 8 of such amended motion.
Judgment Felton, J., reversed. C. J., concur. Nichols, Rehearing.
On Motion motion their rehearing the defendants in error make аppear much of fact does not in the record that the plaintiff deceased surviving died without issue her. This taken, contention is not well clear and very convincing prima proof facie this re- spect when it was shown that girl the deceased young years age and 7 months of and unmarried.
38379. FRIEDMAN v. THEOFILOS. Presiding Judge. Angeline (hereinafter Mrs. Theofilos Gardner, plaintiff) brought called a suit the Civil Cоurt April Fulton County against 20, 1954, A. M. Friedman (hereinafter defendant). called the The defendant filed de- pleadings statutory fensive within requested time a jury trial. On December 10, 1959, case came on jury. heard against directed verdict the defendant. On February 5, 1960, the defendant filed a