Puckette v. John Bailey Pontiac-Buick-GMC Truck Inc.

The trial court did not err in granting the defendant a directed verdict before the close of evidence, since a motion for directed verdict can be made at the close of an opponent's evidence, and the plaintiff failed to show harm.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

On appeal from the entry of judgment on a jury verdict in his favor concerning his claims for breach of contract against John Bailey Pontiac-Buick-GMC Truck, Inc. “Bailey”, Bryan Puckette argues that the trial court erred when it granted Bailey’s motion for directed verdict as to his claims for punitive damages and attorney fees. We find no error and affirm. “The jury is the final arbiter of the facts, and the verdict must be construed by the trial and appellate courts in the light most favorable to upholding the jury verdict.” Citation and punctuation omitted. Wilmock, Inc. v. French , 185 Ga. App. 259, 261 1 363 SE2d 789 1987. In order to prevail on a motion for directed verdict, however, the movant must show that “there is no conflict in the evidence as to any material issue” and that the evidence introduced, “with all reasonable deductions therefrom,” demanded the verdict sought. South Fulton Medical Center v. Poe , 224 Ga. App. 107, 108 1 480 SE2d 40 1996; see also OCGA § 9-11-50 a.

So viewed, the record shows that in October 2005, Puckette brought in his 2003 GMC truck to Bailey for repairs. During a serviceman’s test drive of the truck, a deer ran out from the side of the road and into the truck, resulting in substantial damage to the right side of the truck and additional damage on the hood and left side. Puckette wanted to trade in the truck for a new one, but the parties could not agree on its value. Puckette wanted a Blue Book retail price of between $21,000 and $22,000, but Bailey offered only $13,000 $3,000 less than the Blue Book trade-in price. The serviceman obtained a repair estimate concerning the right-side damage from a subcontractor in the amount of $1,783.61. Puckette refused this offer and did not pick up the truck, which remained driveable.

Puckette v. John Bailey Pontiac-Buick-GMC Truck Inc.

The trial court did not err in granting the defendant a directed verdict before the close of evidence, since a motion for directed verdict can be made at the close of an opponent's evidence, and the plaintiff failed to show harm.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report