Augusta-Aiken Railway & Electric Corp. v. Hafer

94 S.E. 252, 21 Ga. App. 246, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 540
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedNovember 13, 1917
Docket8413
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 94 S.E. 252 (Augusta-Aiken Railway & Electric Corp. v. Hafer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Augusta-Aiken Railway & Electric Corp. v. Hafer, 94 S.E. 252, 21 Ga. App. 246, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 540 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. The word, “owner,'’ as used in the Civil Code (1910), § 4420, is not synonomous with “landlord,” as the latter word is used in § 3694; and where the owner of land has fully parted with both possession and right of possession by any lawful contract of rental, his liabilities are those prescribed by § 3694. In such a case § 4420 is without application. It is otherwise where the possession or the right of possession is not fully parted with.

2. Until such a landlord is put upon notice that the rented premises are out of repair, he is not liable in damages for a failure to make the necessary repairs. Stack v. Harris, 111 Ga. 149 (36 S. E. 615); Ocean Steamship Co. v. Hamilton, 112 Ga. 901 (38 S. E. 204).

3. The fact that the rented premises consisted of an amusement park, and the further fact that the landlord — a railway company — thereafter advertised the amusements at the park for the sole purpose of increasing the passenger traffic over its line of road leading to the park, do not affect the application of the principles announced above.

4. In view of the foregoing rulings, the evidence did not authorize the charges to the jury of which complaint is made, or any verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

5. The court erred in overruling the defendant’s motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Tribble v. Somers
156 S.E.2d 130 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Kreiss v. Allatoona Landing, Inc.
133 S.E.2d 602 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1963)
National Distributing Co. v. Georgia Industrial Realty Co.
127 S.E.2d 303 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1962)
Golf Club Co. v. Rothstein
102 S.E.2d 654 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1958)
Nunnally v. Shockley
87 S.E.2d 115 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1955)
Rothberg v. Bradley
69 S.E.2d 293 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1952)
Davis v. City of Atlanta
66 S.E.2d 188 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Goettee v. Carlyle
22 S.E.2d 854 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Edwards v. Lassiter
20 S.E.2d 451 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Dobbs v. Noble
189 S.E. 694 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)
Smith v. State Mutual Life Insurance
151 S.E. 554 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
Crossgrove v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
118 S.E. 694 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
94 S.E. 252, 21 Ga. App. 246, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 540, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/augusta-aiken-railway-electric-corp-v-hafer-gactapp-1917.