Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Haden

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Haden

96 S.E. 502, 22 Ga. App. 589, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 611

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 1, 1918

Docket9405

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 96 S.E. 502 (Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Haden) 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.

Bluebook

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Haden, 96 S.E. 502, 22 Ga. App. 589, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 611 (Ga. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodwortii, J.

1. Under the pleadings and evidence in this case the court erred in refusing to give to the jury certain instructions, duly requested, as follows (this issue not havipg been fully and clearly covered by the charge given) : (a) “In cases where a railway company is sued for an alleged injury, caused by the fright of a horse at the noise of or sight of an engine or ears, the plaintiff can not recover for an injury received from such cause, unless it appears that the noise made by the engine and' cars was both unusual and unnecessary at the time and place set forth and alleged.” (b) “If the engine or cars made an unusual noise, but at the same time a noise necessary, then the plaintiff can not recover. Before she can x-eeover it must appear that the noise made was both unusual and unnecessai-y.”

2. If there were other errors committed they are of such character that they will not likely occur upon a second trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.

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

Bloodwortii, J.

1. Under the pleadings and evidence in this case the court erred in refusing to give to the jury certain instructions, duly requested, as follows (this issue not havipg been fully and clearly covered by the charge given) : (a) “In cases where a railway company is sued for an alleged injury, caused by the fright of a horse at the noise of or sight of an engine or ears, the plaintiff can not recover for an injury received from such cause, unless it appears that the noise made by the engine and' cars was both unusual and unnecessary at the time and place set forth and alleged.” (b) “If the engine or cars made an unusual noise, but at the same time a noise necessary, then the plaintiff can not recover. Before she can x-eeover it must appear that the noise made was both unusual and unnecessai-y.”

2. If there were other errors committed they are of such character that they will not likely occur upon a second trial.

Judgment reversed.

Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 S.E. 502, 22 Ga. App. 589, 1918 Ga. App. LEXIS 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/central-of-georgia-railway-co-v-haden-gactapp-1918.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack