Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

147 Ga. 323

Whatley v. Long

Supreme Court of Georgia

Decided October 20, 1917

Supreme Court of Georgia · decided 1917-10-20

<p>Where in a suit upon a promissory note the plaintiff makes out a prima facie ease, and the burden of proof is shifted to the defendant, it is error for the court to' charge the jury that the defendant must prove his contentions “tó a reasonable and a moral certainty.”</p>

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1917-10-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 1999

10 state decisions

30191719201930194019501960197019801990decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gilbert, J.

¶1Mrs. - Laura Long brought suit against W. E. Whatley. The suit as finally submitted to the jury had for its purpose the "recovery of a judgment on a protaissory note. The defendant denied liability, and, in addition, set up a claim for improvements made on the property of the plaintiff, by way of recoupment. The court-charged the jury as follows: “As I stated, the onus is upon the plaintiff asserting and affirming certain facts to make out her prima facie "case. When the plaintiff shows a breach of that contract by the defendant, and introduces her note, and presents to you evidence of the fact that notice of attorney’s fees has been given, the burden of proof has been shifted. It becomes necessary then for the defendant to prove to a reasonable and moral certainty that his contentions are true.” Error is assigned on this charge, because it places a greater burden upon the defendant than the law requires. This being a civil case, the party upon whom the burden of proof rests is only required by law to prove his contentions by a preponderance of the evidence. This charge, therefore, was prejudicial error requiring the grant of a new trial. •

¶2Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, C. J., and Beck, P. J., absent.
/147/ga/323 · .json · Public domain