Carter v. Central of Georgia Railroad
This text of 256 S.E.2d 149 (Carter v. Central of Georgia Railroad) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiff, dissatisfied with the amount of her verdict for personal injuries sustained in an automobile collision, contends that the evidence was insufficient to warrant the court’s charge on the doctrines of comparative negligence, equal negligence, and avoidance.
The usual criteria are well known. "It is a well established rule that an instruction is not abstract or inapplicable where there is any evidence, however slight, on which to predicate it. Camp v. Phillips, 42 Ga. 289. 'To justify a charge on a given subject, it is not necessary there should be direct evidence going to that point; it is enough if there be something from which a legitimate process of reasoning can be carried on in respect to it.’ Pope v. Associated Cab Co., 90 Ga. App. 560, 561 (83 SE2d 310). Accord, Carroll v. Hayes, 98 Ga. App. 450, 455 (105 SE2d 755).” East Side Auto Parts v. Wilson, 146 Ga. App. 753 *868 (247 SE2d 571) (1978). "To warrant the court in charging the jury on a given topic it is not necessary that the evidence should shine upon it with a clear light but 'it is enough if glimpses of it be afforded by the evidence.’ Brown v. Matthews, 79 Ga. 1 (2) (4 SE 13).” Walden v. State, 121 Ga. App. 142, 145 (1) (173 SE2d 110) (1970).
The collision at issue took place in the middle of a congested intersection, and we find nothing to take the case out of the above rules.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
256 S.E.2d 149, 149 Ga. App. 867, 1979 Ga. App. LEXIS 2067, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-central-of-georgia-railroad-gactapp-1979.