Dunbar v. Hines

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dunbar v. Hines

111 S.E. 744, 28 Ga. App. 479, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 626

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 13, 1922

Docket11493

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 111 S.E. 744 (Dunbar v. Hines) 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

Dunbar v. Hines, 111 S.E. 744, 28 Ga. App. 479, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 626 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

This was an action for damages against the director-general of railroads. The petition contained two counts. The trial court sustained general demurrers to each count and dismissed the case. This judgment was affirmed by this court. Dunbar v. Hines, 25 Ga. App. 675 (104 S. E. 574). Upon certiorari the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of this court as to the ruling that the first count of the petition did not set forth a cause of action, and affirmed it as to the ruling that the second count did not set forth a cause of action. The Supreme Court directed also that leave be given to the plaintiff so to amend the second count as to show that he did not know of the defect and danger in the engine-house referred to in that count. See the full opinion of the Supreme Court (152 Ga. 865, 111 S. E. 396). Accordingly, the judgment formerly rendered by this court is vacated, and the judgment of the trial court, sustaining the general demurrer to the first count of the petition, is reversed, and its judgment sustaining the general demurrer to the second count is affirmed, with direction that leave be given the plaintiff to amend that count in accordance with the mandate of the Supreme Court.

Judgment reversed in part, and affirmed in part, with direction.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Broyles, C. J.

This was an action for damages against the director-general of railroads. The petition contained two counts. The trial court sustained general demurrers to each count and dismissed the case. This judgment was affirmed by this court. Dunbar v. Hines, 25 Ga. App. 675 (104 S. E. 574). Upon certiorari the Supreme Court reversed the judgment of this court as to the ruling that the first count of the petition did not set forth a cause of action, and affirmed it as to the ruling that the second count did not set forth a cause of action. The Supreme Court directed also that leave be given to the plaintiff so to amend the second count as to show that he did not know of the defect and danger in the engine-house referred to in that count. See the full opinion of the Supreme Court (152 Ga. 865, 111 S. E. 396). Accordingly, the judgment formerly rendered by this court is vacated, and the judgment of the trial court, sustaining the general demurrer to the first count of the petition, is reversed, and its judgment sustaining the general demurrer to the second count is affirmed, with direction that leave be given the plaintiff to amend that count in accordance with the mandate of the Supreme Court.

Judgment reversed in part, and affirmed in part, with direction.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 S.E. 744, 28 Ga. App. 479, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunbar-v-hines-gactapp-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack