2021 Georgia Code
Title 9 - Civil Practice
Chapter 10 - Civil Practice and Procedure Generally
Article 1 - General Provisions
§ 9-10-8. Approval or Disapproval of Verdict by Judge Forbidden; Discharge or Commendation of Jury for Verdict Not Permitted; Judge Expressing Approval or Disapproval Disqualified From Presiding at New Trial

1. No judge of any court shall either directly or indirectly express in open court his approval or disapproval of the verdict of any jury in any case tried before him, except as provided in this Code section; nor may the judge discharge any jury upon the ground that the verdict rendered in any case does not meet with his approval.
2. No judge of any court may commend or compliment a jury during the term of any court for discharging its duty if the commendation or compliment has the effect of approving a verdict.
3. If any judge of any court either directly or indirectly expresses in open court his approval or disapproval of the verdict of the jury in any case tried before him, he shall be disqualified from presiding in the case in the event a new trial is granted.
4. Nothing in this Code section shall have the effect of prohibiting a judge of any court from approving or disapproving the verdict of a jury in any case tried before him in hearing a motion for a new trial that comes on before him; however, the approval or disapproval on the hearing of a motion for new trial shall be expressed in the formal order of the judge in granting or overruling the motion and not otherwise.

(Ga. L. 1918, p. 168, §§ 1-3; Code 1933, §§ 110-201, 110-202, 110-203.)

- Corresponding provisions relating to criminal procedure, §§ 17-9-22,17-9-23.

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Judge's options when unsatisfied with verdict.

- If judge is not satisfied that the verdict as returned is proper, before receiving the verdict the judge may require the jury to return to the room and correct its verdict, under proper instructions from the court, or, after the verdict is received and recorded and the jury is dispersed, the judge may grant a new trial; but the judge is without power to change and modify the verdict after it is received and recorded, and the jury has dispersed. Ballard v. Turner, 147 Ga. App. 584, 249 S.E.2d 637 (1978).

Where a verdict is erroneous on its face, the trial judge may determine from the jury, before its dispersal, what its true intent had been, give correct instructions on how various verdicts might be framed under the evidence, and to return jury to the jury room to correct the error. Ballard v. Turner, 147 Ga. App. 584, 249 S.E.2d 637 (1978).

Trial judge may poll the jury as to intendment of its verdict in a proper case. Ballard v. Turner, 147 Ga. App. 584, 249 S.E.2d 637 (1978).

- If, on being polled, a juror's response demonstrates that no unanimous verdict has been reached, the proper remedy is for the trial court to direct the jury to retire for further deliberations. There is no requirement that the poll be continued after one juror's response has demonstrated a lack of unanimity. Hunter v. State, 202 Ga. App. 195, 413 S.E.2d 526 (1991).

- Where a jury makes a mistake in writing a verdict, and the verdict as returned into court does not express or contain its true finding, the jury, before dispersing, may change or modify its verdict in matter of substance so as to express the true intention and finding of the jury. Ballard v. Turner, 147 Ga. App. 584, 249 S.E.2d 637 (1978).

After jury disperses and verdict is received and recorded, it may not be amended in a matter of substance, even where the jury has found punitive but no general damages. Ballard v. Turner, 147 Ga. App. 584, 249 S.E.2d 637 (1978).

Only disqualification which attaches to a trial judge who violates this section is that the trial judge shall be disqualified from presiding in a subsequent trial of the case, in the event a new trial is granted. Ingram v. Grimes, 213 Ga. 652, 100 S.E.2d 914 (1957) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-10-8).

- Trial of an issue of fact cannot be termed "new trial" under this section unless it is another or second trial for judicial determination of the same fact. Felker v. Still, 41 Ga. App. 462, 153 S.E. 781 (1930) (see O.C.G.A. § 9-10-8).

Cited in Kendrick v. Blackwell, 189 Ga. 225, 5 S.E.2d 633 (1939).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

Am. Jur. 2d.

- 75 Am. Jur. 2d, Trial, § 276.

- 89 C.J.S., Trial, § 520 et seq.

- Necessity of repeating definition of legal or technical term in different parts of instructions in which it is employed, 7 A.L.R. 135.

Threat to dismiss jury in criminal case for term, unless they could agree on verdict, as coercion, 10 A.L.R. 421.

Disqualification of judge who presided at trial or of juror as ground of habeas corpus, 124 A.L.R. 1079.

Statute providing for change of judge or venue on ground of bias or prejudice as applicable to proceeding for modification of decree of divorce, 143 A.L.R. 411.

Disqualification of judge in pending case as subject to revocation or removal, 162 A.L.R. 641.

Reviewability of action of judge in disqualifying himself, 162 A.L.R. 654.

What constitutes accused's consent to court's discharge of jury or to grant of state's motion for mistrial which will constitute waiver of former jeopardy plea, 63 A.L.R.2d 782.

Verdict-urging instructions in civil case commenting on weight of majority view or authorizing compromise, 41 A.L.R.3d 845.

Disqualification of original trial judge to sit on retrial after reversal or mistrial, 60 A.L.R.3d 176.

Disqualification or recusal of judge due to comments at Continuing Legal Education (CLE) seminar or other educational meetings, 49 A.L.R.6th 93.