Fairburn & Atlanta Railway & Electric Co. v. Rayford

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Fairburn & Atlanta Railway & Electric Co. v. Rayford

110 S.E. 508, 28 Ga. App. 189, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 374

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 10, 1922

Docket12473

StatusPublished

This text of 110 S.E. 508 (Fairburn & Atlanta Railway & Electric Co. v. Rayford) 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

Fairburn & Atlanta Railway & Electric Co. v. Rayford, 110 S.E. 508, 28 Ga. App. 189, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 374 (Ga. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

In a suit against a street-car company by a widow to recover damages for the negligent homicide of her husband, a verdict finding that the homicide resulted from the defendant’s negligence is supported by evidence that the deceased was killed by being knocked down by a moving street-car of the defendant, and where the inference is authorized that the deceased was in full view of the motorman operating the car, and was seen by the latter walking along the public highway within the corporate limits of a town and proceeding in the direction in which the car was running on a track of the defendant laid along the public highway, and was seen by the motorman approaching the ear track at an angle and with the intention of crossing the track, and that it was apparent to the motorman that the deceased was oblivious to the approach of the car and did not, on account of the noise of a moving train of another railroad company on a parallel track, hear the sound of the gong on the defendant’s car or the warning shouts of the passengers, and where it appears that the car was running at a rate of speed of 20 to 25 miles per hour, and that when the motorman first observed, or could have observed, the deceased in approaching the car track under such conditions, the deceased was about thirty yards from the car.

■Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

In a suit against a street-car company by a widow to recover damages for the negligent homicide of her husband, a verdict finding that the homicide resulted from the defendant’s negligence is supported by evidence that the deceased was killed by being knocked down by a moving street-car of the defendant, and where the inference is authorized that the deceased was in full view of the motorman operating the car, and was seen by the latter walking along the public highway within the corporate limits of a town and proceeding in the direction in which the car was running on a track of the defendant laid along the public highway, and was seen by the motorman approaching the ear track at an angle and with the intention of crossing the track, and that it was apparent to the motorman that the deceased was oblivious to the approach of the car and did not, on account of the noise of a moving train of another railroad company on a parallel track, hear the sound of the gong on the defendant’s car or the warning shouts of the passengers, and where it appears that the car was running at a rate of speed of 20 to 25 miles per hour, and that when the motorman first observed, or could have observed, the deceased in approaching the car track under such conditions, the deceased was about thirty yards from the car.

■Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Hill, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 S.E. 508, 28 Ga. App. 189, 1922 Ga. App. LEXIS 374, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fairburn-atlanta-railway-electric-co-v-rayford-gactapp-1922.