Burns v. Ocean Steamship Co.

Supreme Court of Georgia

Burns v. Ocean Steamship Co.

11 S.E. 493, 84 Ga. 709

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 21, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 S.E. 493 (Burns v. Ocean Steamship Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burns v. Ocean Steamship Co., 11 S.E. 493, 84 Ga. 709 (Ga. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Blandford, Justice.

The plaintiff brought his action against the defendant, claiming damages for an injury which he received by reason of the negligence of the defendant, in this that the defendant had a defective ladder leading into the hold of its ship, because of a round being out of the same; that a person, who was engaged in the same work with the plaintiff, in attempting to descend this ladder, by reason of the defect therein, fell, or to save himself, jumped upon or against a bale of cotton, which fell through the hatchway leading to the lower hold of the vessel, where the plaintiff was at work, and, without any fault on the part of the plaintiff, struck him and broke his leg, causing him great pain and suffering, and he was thereby damaged and injured as complained of.

The testimony introduced by the plaintiff tended to sustain these allegations in his declaration. It was shown that the ladder mentioned in plaintiff’s declaration was defective, in that there was a round of the same missing; and that the plaintiff was injured in the way and manner set out in his declaration. The court sustained a motion to nonsuit plaintiff’s case, and this is excepted to.

[711]*711"We think tlie plaintiff made out such a case by his testimony as entitled him to have the same considered by a jury, and that the court committed error in awarding a nonsuit in this ease. So the judgment is

Reversed.

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

Blandford, Justice.

The plaintiff brought his action against the defendant, claiming damages for an injury which he received by reason of the negligence of the defendant, in this that the defendant had a defective ladder leading into the hold of its ship, because of a round being out of the same; that a person, who was engaged in the same work with the plaintiff, in attempting to descend this ladder, by reason of the defect therein, fell, or to save himself, jumped upon or against a bale of cotton, which fell through the hatchway leading to the lower hold of the vessel, where the plaintiff was at work, and, without any fault on the part of the plaintiff, struck him and broke his leg, causing him great pain and suffering, and he was thereby damaged and injured as complained of.

The testimony introduced by the plaintiff tended to sustain these allegations in his declaration. It was shown that the ladder mentioned in plaintiff’s declaration was defective, in that there was a round of the same missing; and that the plaintiff was injured in the way and manner set out in his declaration. The court sustained a motion to nonsuit plaintiff’s case, and this is excepted to.

[711]*711"We think tlie plaintiff made out such a case by his testimony as entitled him to have the same considered by a jury, and that the court committed error in awarding a nonsuit in this ease. So the judgment is

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 S.E. 493, 84 Ga. 709, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burns-v-ocean-steamship-co-ga-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack