Davis v. Metzger

168 S.E.2d 866, 119 Ga. App. 750, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1233
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedMay 26, 1969
Docket44253, 44254, 44255
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 168 S.E.2d 866 (Davis v. Metzger) 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. Metzger, 168 S.E.2d 866, 119 Ga. App. 750, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1233 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Opinions

Haul, Judge.

1. The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

2. The plaintiffs argue that the fact of driving on the left side of the road is negligence per se, and the defendant’s denial of negligence is but an allegation of a conclusion in the face of this fact. The statutory requirements to drive on the right side of the roadway (Ga. L. 1953, Nov. Sess., pp. 556, 581, 582, as amended; Code Ann. §§ 68-1633, 68-1634) on their face are not absolute and do not prohibit driving on the left at all places and in all circumstances. The allegations of the pleadings in the present case do not establish as a matter of law that the defendant’s driving on the left side of the road was a violation of a statute and negligence per se. That the defendant at the trial may be unable to prove that his driving on the left side of the roadway was not a statutory violation does not authorize a judgment on the pleadings. M. L. Lee & Co. v. Cardboard &c. Corp., 36 F.R.D. 27, 29 (E.D. Pa. 1964). We cannot say that the pleadings in these cases present a “bare legal question.” See Rosenhan v. United States, 131 F2d 932, 934 (10th Cir. 1942).

Under the Civil Practice Act, general allegations are sufficient to support a plaintiff’s claim for relief. Ga. L. 1966, pp. 609, 619, as amended ('Code Ann. § 81A-108); Vaughn v. McDaniel, 118 Ga. App. 408 (163 SE2d 844); Hunter v. A-1 Bonding Service, 118 Ga. App. 498 (164 SE2d 246), cert. denied 118 Ga. App. 866. In most cases the same liberal rule will apply to the defendant’s pleadings. Code Ann. § 81A-108 (b, f); 2A Moore’s Federal Practice 1813, § 8.19. Since the fact admitted by the [752]*752defendant does not clearly entitle any of the plaintiffs to a judgment on their motions, the trial court did not err in overruling the motions for judgment on the pleadings. Nickel Rim Mines Ltd. v. Universal-Cyclops Steel Corp., 202 FSupp. 170, 172 (D. N. J. 1962); 2A Moore’s Federal Practice 2342, § 12.15; 1A Barron and Holtzoff 401, § 360.

Judgments affirmed.

Jordan, P. J., concurs. Whitman, J., concurs specially.

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

Related

In the Interest Of: D. W.
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
Charles Racette v. Bank of America
Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012
Racette v. Bank of America, N.A.
733 S.E.2d 457 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 2012)
McDonough Construction Co. v. McLendon Electric Co.
250 S.E.2d 424 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1978)
Whitby v. Maloy
245 S.E.2d 5 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1978)
Skipper v. Collins
229 S.E.2d 790 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1976)
Knickerbocker Tax Systems, Inc. v. Texaco, Inc.
203 S.E.2d 290 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Snooks v. Factory Square, Inc.
201 S.E.2d 168 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Davis v. Metzger
168 S.E.2d 866 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 S.E.2d 866, 119 Ga. App. 750, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-metzger-gactapp-1969.