Clay v. Macon & Birmingham Railroad

36 S.E. 233, 111 Ga. 839, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 797
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedMay 16, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 36 S.E. 233 (Clay v. Macon & Birmingham Railroad) 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
Clay v. Macon & Birmingham Railroad, 36 S.E. 233, 111 Ga. 839, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 797 (Ga. 1900).

Opinion

Lewis, J.

There being some testimony which might have warranted the jury in finding that the plaintiff’s husband, while upon the track of the defendant in front of an approaching train, was, either from intoxication or other cause, incapable for the time being of taking the proper care for his own safety, and that the company’s servants in charge of the train, being aware of these facts in time to stop it before it struck and killed, him, failed to exercise due diligence in this respect, the case should have been submitted to-the jury, and the court erred in granting a nonsuit.

Judgm.ent reversed.

All the Justices concurring, except Fish, J., absent.

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

Related

Bennett Drug Stores Inc. v. Mosely
20 S.E.2d 208 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1942)
Rollestone v. Cassirer & Co.
59 S.E. 442 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 S.E. 233, 111 Ga. 839, 1900 Ga. LEXIS 797, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clay-v-macon-birmingham-railroad-ga-1900.