John Sammons Bell

This case involved a libel lawsuit brought by a newspaper editor against the newspaper and its managing editor over an opinion column titled "An Apology is in Order" that criticized the editor for including what the column called "gratuitous editorializing" in a front-page story and referred to the newspaper staff as "turkeys." The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on the pleadings, finding no defamation as a matter of law. The appellate court reversed, holding that the column was susceptible to a defamatory meaning by innuendo because the term "turkey" can imply ineptitude and the plaintiff was involved in assembling the paper. The court further noted that the undeveloped record left open questions about whether the statements were privileged and whether the plaintiff qualified as a public figure.

torts & liabilityfree speech

The case concerned a defendant's conviction for motor vehicle homicide based on driving under the influence of alcohol that caused another person's death in a three-car collision. The appellate court reviewed challenges to the admission of blood test results from both the victim and the defendant, as well as the trial court's handling of jury instructions on the lesser included offense of driving under the influence. The court determined that the blood tests were properly admitted into evidence. However, it reversed the conviction, holding that the evidence raised the lesser offense as an alternative verdict and that the trial court committed harmful error by first promising to instruct the jury on it, allowing defense counsel to argue accordingly, and then refusing to give the charge.

criminal lawprocedure

The case concerned a bank's suit to recover principal, interest, and attorney fees on an allegedly unpaid promissory note originally issued to another bank that the plaintiff claimed to have succeeded. The defendant denied the note's execution and validity and raised defenses including usury, but failed to respond to requests for admissions. The trial court excluded a photocopy of the succession agreement and related documents for lack of foundation and granted the defendant's motion for involuntary dismissal at the close of the plaintiff's evidence. The appellate court reversed, holding that the admissions were not properly introduced as evidence and that the photocopy was admissible under Code § 38-710 without the additional foundation demanded by the trial court, rendering the exclusion of the note and other documents harmful error.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

The case involved a counterclaim for defamation filed by defendant Larry Garrett after being named in a personal injury complaint arising from an automobile collision. The plaintiff alleged Garrett owned the vehicle, provided it for family use under the family purpose doctrine, and that his son negligently entrusted it to an intoxicated driver with a history of accidents. Garrett denied ownership and familial ties, claimed the allegations harmed his reputation as a law enforcement officer when publicized, and asserted a libel claim. After the plaintiff dismissed her complaint against him and moved for summary judgment on the counterclaim, the trial court granted the motion, which was affirmed on appeal. The court held that allegations in pleadings in a court of competent jurisdiction are privileged and not libelous if pertinent and material to the relief sought, even if false and malicious.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In Area v. Cagle, the executors of C. J. Bowers' estate sued the defendant on three unpaid promissory notes that the defendant admitted executing. The defendant raised a defense based on an alleged oral agreement that the debt would be discharged if Bowers died before repayment, supported by affidavits. The trial court overruled the plaintiffs' objection to this evidence and granted summary judgment to the defendant while denying the plaintiffs' motion. The appellate court held that objections to the affidavits were timely, that the parol evidence was inadmissible under Georgia law as it varied the terms of the written notes, and that without a valid defense the plaintiffs were entitled to summary judgment. The court reversed the trial court's rulings and directed entry of judgment for the plaintiffs.

procedurebusiness & regulatory

The case Cherry v. State involved a defendant's appeal from his conviction on two counts of aggravated battery. The court held that the defendant's testimony denying a prior felony conviction involving moral turpitude did not warrant a jury instruction on good character, as such a charge requires evidence of general reputation rather than a specific denial. Additionally, the evidence presented was sufficient to support the conviction. Therefore, the trial court's judgment was affirmed.

criminal lawprocedure