George A. Coleman and George Franklin Coleman, by Next Friend George A. Coleman v. Guarantee Reserve Life Ins. Co. Of Hammond, Indiana

337 F.2d 288
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided October 12, 1964·No. 21423·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The only substantial point raised on this appeal is the correctness of the trial court’s charge as to the standard of care required in a so-called “guest” automobile passenger case. We think it clear that under the Georgia cases as exemplified by Chancey v. Cobb, 102 Ga.App. 636, 117 S.E.2d 189, the child riding with its mother was “[a] minor child of tender years riding at the invitation of the driver and owner of [the] automobile, with the express consent and acceptance of its mother,” and thus the child was “a guest of the driver * * * within the rule rendering the driver liable to such guest only for gross negligence.”

The judgment is affirmed.

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

George A. Coleman and George Franklin Coleman, by Next Friend George A. Coleman v. Guarantee Reserve Life Ins. Co. Of Hammond, Indiana, 337 F.2d 288 (5th Cir. 1964).

337 F.2d 288 (George A. Coleman and George Franklin Coleman, by Next Friend George A. Coleman v. Guarantee Reserve Life Ins. Co. Of Hammond, Indiana) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Justice Ex Rel. Justice v. Gatchell
325 A.2d 97 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1974)