Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Davis v. Gavalas

Davis v. Gavalas

139 S.E. 577, 37 Ga. App. 242, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 607
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedSeptember 30, 1927
Docket17668
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 139 S.E. 577 (Davis v. Gavalas) 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
Davis v. Gavalas, 139 S.E. 577, 37 Ga. App. 242, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 607 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. In a suit against the parents of a child for personal injuries alleged to have been received by the plaintiff as a result of being run into by the child, who at the time was' five years of 'age, while the child was riding a velocipede upon a public sidewalk at night, allegations to the effect that the parents furnished the velocipede to'the child and knowingly permitted him to ride it upon the sidewalk und'er the circumstances indicated, and that the child, who on account of his tender years was irresponsible, incompetent, and unqualified to use the velocipede with such care and diligence as not to injure the plaintiff, used the velocipede and negligently collided with the plaintiff, were equivalent to alleging that the parents were negligent in knowingly permitting a child of such age to use the velocipede in the manner stated, and charged actionable negligence on the part of the parents.

2. Where the petition alleged that the child was, on account of his tender [243]*243years, incapable of committing negligence, no cause of action against the child was set out.

Decided September 30, 1927. W. D. Lanier, for plaintiff. W. Inman Gurry, for defendants.

3. This being a suit by the person injured against the parents and the child jointly, to recover damages for the injuries received by the plaintiff, the petition sets out a cause of action against. the parents, but fails to set out a cause of action against the child.

Judgment reversed m part and affirmed in part.

Jenhins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

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

Related

BRANDON SOWELL v. SANDRA G. SOLOMON
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2022
Stewart v. Harvard
520 S.E.2d 752 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1999)
Manuel v. Koonce
425 S.E.2d 921 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)
Jackson v. Moore
378 S.E.2d 726 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1989)
Mayer v. Self
341 S.E.2d 924 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Hill v. Morrison
286 S.E.2d 467 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1981)
Muse v. Ozment
264 S.E.2d 328 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1980)
Scarboro v. Lauk
210 S.E.2d 848 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1974)
Corley v. Lewless
182 S.E.2d 766 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1971)
Stephens v. Stewart
165 S.E.2d 572 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Sagnibene v. State Wholesalers, Inc.
160 S.E.2d 274 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1968)
Miles v. Harrison
154 S.E.2d 377 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Chester v. Evans
153 S.E.2d 583 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Barlow v. Lord
145 S.E.2d 272 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1965)
Assurance Co. of America v. Bell
134 S.E.2d 540 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1963)
Herrin v. Lámar
126 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1962)
Matthews v. Johnson
111 S.E.2d 158 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1959)
Jackson v. Ratliff
84 So. 2d 103 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 1956)
Ellis v. D'Angelo
253 P.2d 675 (California Court of Appeal, 1953)
Bateman v. Crim
34 A.2d 257 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 S.E. 577, 37 Ga. App. 242, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-gavalas-gactapp-1927.