Carger v. Macon Railway & Light Co.
This text of 55 S.E. 914 (Carger v. Macon Railway & Light 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.
Opinion
When the motorman saw that the mules being driven by the plaintiff’s intestate in the street, where he had a right to be, were being frightened by the car, was it not his duty to stop, in order to give the intestate some opportunity of avoiding a catastrophe ? Under those conditions was it not negligence to continue his approach, sounding the gong? These were questions for the jury. See, in this connection, Oates v. Metropolitan Street Railway Company, 168 Mo. 535. The -evidence was not such as would have authorized the co.urt to hold that the vieiousness of the animals was the proximate cause of the injury. That question was .one also for the jury. -It was erroneous to grant a nonsuit.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
55 S.E. 914, 126 Ga. 626, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 488, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carger-v-macon-railway-light-co-ga-1906.