Home/Court of Appeals of Georgia/Houser v. Walter Ballard Optical Co.

Houser v. Walter Ballard Optical Co.

133 S.E.2d 924, 108 Ga. App. 559, 1963 Ga. App. LEXIS 703
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided October 25, 1963·No. 40344·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Pannell, Judge.

The depositions of the plaintiff, the only evidence on the hearing on the motion for summary judgment by the defendants, showed no negligence on the part of either defendant, and that, if there were negligence on the part of either of the defendants, the plaintiff had knowledge of such negligence and her injury was due to her own want of ordinary care. See dissenting opinion of Judge Jenkins in Wardlaw v. Executive Comm. Baptist Convention, 47 Ga. App. 595, 596 (170 SE 830), reversed in 180 Ga. 148 (178 SE 155); Vaissiere v. Pound Hotel Co., 184 Ga. 72 (190 SE 354). The case of Boyd v. Gardner, 62 Ga. App. 662 (9 SE2d 202) is clearly distinguishable on its facts. It follows that the trial court did not err in granting the motion for summary judgment of each defendant.

Judgment affirmed.

Bell, P. J., and Hall, J., concur.

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

Houser v. Walter Ballard Optical Co., 133 S.E.2d 924, 108 Ga. App. 559, 1963 Ga. App. LEXIS 703 (Ga. Ct. App. 1963).

133 S.E.2d 924 (Houser v. Walter Ballard Optical Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Martin v. Bank South
333 S.E.2d 616 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1985)
Lamberson v. Norris
218 S.E.2d 658 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1975)
Emory University v. Williams
195 S.E.2d 464 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1973)
Herschel McDaniel Funeral Home, Inc. v. Hines
183 S.E.2d 7 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1971)