Home/Supreme Court of Georgia/Duke v. Bibb Manufacturing Co.

Duke v. Bibb Manufacturing Co.

48 S.E. 408, 120 Ga. 1074, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 801
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 12, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 48 S.E. 408 (Duke v. Bibb Manufacturing Co.) 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
Duke v. Bibb Manufacturing Co., 48 S.E. 408, 120 Ga. 1074, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 801 (Ga. 1904).

Opinion

Lamar, J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) The plaintiff was at work on one side of a machine. The cord was fastened to the other. An inspection would have disclosed its insecure condition, and that it was liable to get caught in the shaft. But it appeared that he had not examined and did not know of its condition. There is in the evidence nothing which shows that it was his duty to inspect, or that in the course of his employment he was required to be on that side,of the machine where the cord was tied, and where he could have seen that it was unsafe. The plaintiff- proved his case as laid, without establishing such additional facts as disproved his right to recover. Evans v. Josephine Mills, 119 Ga. 451. It was therefore error to grant the nonsuit. Austin v. Appling, 88 Ga. 55, 56 (2); Central Railroad v. Haslett, 74 Ga. 59. Jiidgment reversed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Whited v. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co.
76 S.E.2d 408 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Kirby v. Atlanta Gas Light Co.
67 S.E.2d 413 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Clark v. Bandy
27 S.E.2d 17 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1943)
Alford v. Zeigler
16 S.E.2d 69 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Pollard v. Weeks
4 S.E.2d 722 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Linenkohl v. Curington
124 S.E. 365 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Rountree v. Seaboard Air-Line Railway Co.
120 S.E. 654 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
International Cotton Mills v. Carroll
95 S.E. 472 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)
Naylor v. Chickamauga Quarry & Construction Co.
91 S.E. 1063 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Gibbs v. Tifton Cotton Mills
82 S.E. 921 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1914)
Hubbard v. Macon Railway & Light Co.
62 S.E. 1018 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1908)
Southern Cotton-Oil Co. v. Gladman
58 S.E. 249 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1907)
Southern Cotton Oil Co. v. Dukes
49 S.E. 788 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 S.E. 408, 120 Ga. 1074, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duke-v-bibb-manufacturing-co-ga-1904.