holding that an error in the admission of evidence of destruction of or injury to landowner's trees was harmless in light of trial court's subsequent instruction to the jury in a negligence and trespass action that the proper measure of damages was the "`difference in the value of the land before and after the trespass'" and that "`[t]he value of the timber [was] not the measure of damages'"
How later courts described this case
- holding that an error in the admission of evidence of destruction of or injury to landowner's trees was harmless in light of trial court's subsequent instruction to the jury in a negligence and trespass action that the proper measure of damages was the "`difference in the value of the land before and after the trespass'" and that "`[t]he value of the timber [was] not the measure of damages'"
- action cannot be maintained until the claim has been presented to county commission and disallowed
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
I believe that damages for trespass and negligence that accrued before September 6, 1995, would be barred by § 11-12-8 , Ala. Code 1975. However, it does not appear that Jefferson County properly made this argument to the trial court. Jefferson County did not make a motion in limine seeking to exclude evidence of damage occurring before September 6, 1995. It does not appear from the trial transcript that Jefferson County objected to testimony of damages as being time barred at trial either. Jefferson County did argue that all claims of trespass and negligence were barred by this statute; however, the evidence showed that many of the claims accrued after September 6, 1995. Therefore, the trial court was correct in denying Jefferson County's requests to hold that all such claims were barred.