Johnson v. Alabama & Georgia Iron Co.

70 S.E. 156, 8 Ga. App. 787, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 148
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided February 15, 1911·No. 2615·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Powell, J.

This is a hard case, and there is always a danger that hard eases will tempt judges into making decisions contrary to the law; and personally we regret that we have to give this ease the end the law compels us to give it. A common laborer engaged in hazardous employment is hurt by one of the hazards of that employment. The only fault attributable to him (if such a thing can be called a fault) is that -he exposed himself to these dangers in order to earn his daily bread. It does look hard that he must stand all the loss resulting from the injury. And yet, under the facts of this case and the law applicable thereto, such is the necessary result; for, despite the plausibility with which his able counsel have grouped the facts toward giving the case the appearance of being actionable as against the master, a careful study of the facts alleged shows that a legal cause of action does not exist.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Johnson v. Alabama & Georgia Iron Co., 70 S.E. 156, 8 Ga. App. 787, 1911 Ga. App. LEXIS 148 (Ga. Ct. App. 1911).

70 S.E. 156 (Johnson v. Alabama & Georgia Iron Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stukes v. Trowell
168 S.E.2d 616 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1969)
Freeman v. Martin
156 S.E.2d 511 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)
Brown v. Mayor of Milledgeville
93 S.E. 25 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)