Hobbs v. Bowie & Terhune

49 S.E. 285, 121 Ga. 421, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 176
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedDecember 10, 1904
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 49 S.E. 285 (Hobbs v. Bowie & Terhune) 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
Hobbs v. Bowie & Terhune, 49 S.E. 285, 121 Ga. 421, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 176 (Ga. 1904).

Opinion

Candler, J.

1. This being a suit for damages by an employee against his employers, which was governed by the common-law doctrine of master and servant; and it affirmatively appearing that the servant had equal means with the master of ascertaining the defective condition of the appliance alleged to have been the cause of his injuries, no recovery can be had against the master.

2. As the defendants offered no evidence, the proper procedure was to grant a nonsuit, rather than direct a verdict for the defendants (Hines v. McLellan, 117 Ga. 845); but inasmuch as the plaintiff, in his petition for certiorari, did not make this point, but contended merely that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence and that the issues should have been submitted to the jury for determination, the judgment of the superior court overruling the certiorari will not be disturbed.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Henderson v. Ocean Steamship Co.
84 S.E. 230 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
49 S.E. 285, 121 Ga. 421, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 176, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hobbs-v-bowie-terhune-ga-1904.