I. Cited and discussed the following authorities. Dixon v. Breland, 192 Miss. 335, 6 So.2d 122; Kincade Lofton v. Stephens (Miss.), 50 So.2d 587; Lee v. Reynolds, 190 Miss. 692, 1 So.2d 487; Murray v. Murray, 239 Miss. 691, 125 So.2d 82; Myrick v. Holifield, 240 Miss. 106, 126 So.2d 508; Scovel v. City of Pascagoula, 233 Miss. 198, 101 So.2d 537; Swartzfager v. Southern Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 236 Miss. 322, 110 So.2d 380; Vasco v. Ford, 212 Miss. 370, 54 So.2d 541; Vaughan v. Bollis, 221 Miss. 589, 73 So.2d 160; Woodmansee v. Garrett, 247 Miss. 148, 153 So.2d 812. Forrest B. Jackson, Jackson, for appellee.

White, Buntin Martin, Gulfport, for appellant. I. Cited and discussed the following authorities: Avent v. Tucker, 188 Miss. 207, 194 So. 596; Dimick v. Schiedt, 293 U.S. 474, 79 L.Ed. 603; Scovel v. City of Pascagoula, 233 Miss. 198, 101 So.2d 537; State, Use of Stevens Enterprises, Inc. v. McDonnell, 236 Miss. 841, 111 So.2d 662; United States v. 93.970 Acres of Land, 258 F.2d 17; Vaughan v. Bollis, 221 Miss. 589, 73 So.2d 160; Wells v. Bennett 229 Miss. 135, 90 So.2d 199, 232 Miss. 736, 100 So.2d 344; Secs. 1536, 8197, Code 1942. Rae Bryant, Gulfport, for appellee.

III. The Court erred in overruling the motion of the plaintiff for a new trial on the ground that the damages awarded by the jury to the plaintiff and against the defendant, Mrs. Mantile S. Murray, are so grossly inadequate as to indicate bias, passion and prejudice on the part of the jury. Boroughs v. Oliver, 226 Miss. 609, 85 So.2d 191; Bush v. Watkins, 224 Miss. 238, 80 So.2d 19; Chapman v. Powers, 150 Miss. 687, 116 So. 609; Flournoy v. Brown, 200 Miss. 171, 26 So.2d 351; Moseley v. Jamison, 68 Miss. 336, 8 So. 744; Scovel v. City of Pascagoula, 233 Miss. 198, 101 So.2d 537; Sohio Petroleum Co. v. Fowler, 231 Miss. 72, 94 So.2d 350; Vaughan v. Bollis, 221 Miss. 589, 73 So.2d 160; The William Branfoot, 48 Fed. 914; Belli Seminar (1958), Trial and Tort Trends, p. xx. Heidelberg, Woodliff, Castle Franks, Jackson, for appellee, Mrs. Jeanine Stone.

II. The verdict was inadequate and contrary to the overwhelming weight of the credible evidence as to the damages. Lee v. Reynolds, 190 Miss. 692, 1 So.2d 487; Murray v. Murray, 239 Miss. 691, 125 So.2d 82; Myrick v. Holifield, 240 Miss. 106, 126 So.2d 508; Scovel v. City of Pascagoula, 233 Miss. 198, 101 So.2d 537; Swartzfager v. Southern Bell Tel. Tel. Co., 236 Miss. 322, 110 So.2d 380; Vasco v. Ford, 212 Miss. 370, 74 So.2d 541; Vaughan v. Bollis, 221 Miss. 389, 73 So.2d 160; Woodmansee v. Garrett, 247 Miss. 148, 153 So.2d 812. Morse Morse, Gulfport, for appellee, Mrs. Arthur J. Rogers.

III. Even if the trial court was correct in refusing to correct the verdict and judgment the erroneous verdict of the jury should have been corrected by granting appellant's motion for a new trial on the question of the amount of his recovery. Flournoy v. Brown, supra; Henry v. R.R. Elkin, Jr. Co., supra; Scovel v. City of Pascagoula, 233 Miss. 198, 101 So.2d 537; Yazoo M.V.R. Co. v. Scott, 108 Miss. 871, 67 So. 491; Rules 12, 13, Supreme Court Rules. Philip Mansour, Greenville, for appellees.