Barber v. East & West Railroad

Supreme Court of Georgia

Barber v. East & West Railroad

36 S.E. 50, 111 Ga. 838, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 796

Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided May 16, 1900·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Little, J.

Inasmuch as it was apparent from the evidence of the plaintiff that he could, by the exercise of ordinary care, have avoided not only the injury, but the consequences to himself of the negligence of the defendant, even if such negligence was shown, he was not entitled to recover, and the nonsuit was properly awarded. Civil Code, § 3830; Perry v. Macon Consolidated Street Railroad Co., 101 Ga. 400.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Pish, J., absent.

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

Little, J.

Inasmuch as it was apparent from the evidence of the plaintiff that he could, by the exercise of ordinary care, have avoided not only the injury, but the consequences to himself of the negligence of the defendant, even if such negligence was shown, he was not entitled to recover, and the nonsuit was properly awarded. Civil Code, § 3830; Perry v. Macon Consolidated Street Railroad Co., 101 Ga. 400.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring, except Pish, J., absent.

Barber v. East & West Railroad, 36 S.E. 50, 111 Ga. 838, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 796 (Ga. 1900).

Pincite

36 S.E. 50 (Barber v. East & West Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related