Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Barfield

63 S.E. 514, 5 Ga. App. 423, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 8
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided January 27, 1909·No. 1240·Published

Opinion

Hill, C. J.

1. The rules of law illustrating the three issues of negligence made by the evidence,— (1) whether the plaintiff was, at the time of his injury, a trespasser; (2) whether he was a licensee; and (3) the relative negligence of both plaintiif and defendant, — were fully, clearly, and accurately submitted to the jury.

2. There is evidence to support the verdict, whether the plaintiff was a trespasser, or a licensee, or was himself guilty of such contributory negligence as was. sufficient to reduce the amount of his damages, though not sufficient, in connection with the greater negligence of the defendant,, to defeat his recovery.

3. The two special assignments of error are without merit.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Barfield, 63 S.E. 514, 5 Ga. App. 423, 1909 Ga. App. LEXIS 8 (Ga. Ct. App. 1909).

63 S.E. 514 (Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Barfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.