Gray v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Gray v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.

92 S.E. 961, 20 Ga. App. 201, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 807

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedJune 14, 1917

Docket8192, 8193

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 S.E. 961 (Gray v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.) 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

Gray v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co., 92 S.E. 961, 20 Ga. App. 201, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 807 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Luke, J.

1. Where, on the trial of an action against a railroad company, for the death of the plaintiff’s husband, the evidence for the plaintiff showed that her husband was on a passenger-train of the defendant, concealed and stealing a ride thereon, and that the last person to see him was a companion who was also concealed on the train, stealing a ride, but who was discovered and carried into the train, and that the body of the plaintiff’s husband was thereafter found by the railroad-track, with a gunshot wound in his head and other bruises on his person, and there was no other account of how he came to his death, no presumption of negligence against the railroad company, under section 2780 of the Civil Code of 1910, arose in favor of the plaintiff.

2. The evidence demanded a verdict -in favor of the defendant, and the court did not err in so directing.

3. The judgment in favor of the defendant in error in the main bill of exceptions being affirmed, the cross-bill of exceptions is dismissed.

Wade, 0. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

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

Luke, J.

1. Where, on the trial of an action against a railroad company, for the death of the plaintiff’s husband, the evidence for the plaintiff showed that her husband was on a passenger-train of the defendant, concealed and stealing a ride thereon, and that the last person to see him was a companion who was also concealed on the train, stealing a ride, but who was discovered and carried into the train, and that the body of the plaintiff’s husband was thereafter found by the railroad-track, with a gunshot wound in his head and other bruises on his person, and there was no other account of how he came to his death, no presumption of negligence against the railroad company, under section 2780 of the Civil Code of 1910, arose in favor of the plaintiff.

2. The evidence demanded a verdict -in favor of the defendant, and the court did not err in so directing.

3. The judgment in favor of the defendant in error in the main bill of exceptions being affirmed, the cross-bill of exceptions is dismissed.

Wade, 0. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 S.E. 961, 20 Ga. App. 201, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-georgia-southern-florida-railway-co-gactapp-1917.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack