Johnson v. Hurt

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Johnson v. Hurt

172 S.E.2d 201, 120 Ga. App. 761, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 921

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 18, 1969

Docket44894

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 172 S.E.2d 201 (Johnson v. Hurt) 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

Johnson v. Hurt, 172 S.E.2d 201, 120 Ga. App. 761, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 921 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Hall, Presiding Judge.

The defendants in a personal injury action appeal from a judgment of $3,500 and enumerate error on the denial of their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The evidence shows that the plaintiff and a friend went to defendant’s farm to inquire about a horse plaintiff had heard was for sale. The evidence is in conflict concerning what, if anything, was said to plaintiff about the gentle nature of the horse and concerning who, if anyone, urged plaintiff to take a trial ride. At any rate, plaintiff rode the horse, was thrown, sustained injuries, and sued the defendants.

'There is no evidence in the record from which the jury could infer that the defendants knew the horse had a dangerous or vicious disposition. Whether plaintiff is proceeding under Code § 105-110 (keeping a vicious or dangerous animal) or in fraud and deceit, proof of scienter is still essential to his case. Chandler v. Gately, 119 Ga. App. 513 (167 SE2d 697); Leatherwood v. Boomershine Motors, 53 Ga. App. 592 (186 SE 897).

The trial court erred in denying defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

Judgment reversed.

Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.

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

Hall, Presiding Judge.

The defendants in a personal injury action appeal from a judgment of $3,500 and enumerate error on the denial of their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. The evidence shows that the plaintiff and a friend went to defendant’s farm to inquire about a horse plaintiff had heard was for sale. The evidence is in conflict concerning what, if anything, was said to plaintiff about the gentle nature of the horse and concerning who, if anyone, urged plaintiff to take a trial ride. At any rate, plaintiff rode the horse, was thrown, sustained injuries, and sued the defendants.

'There is no evidence in the record from which the jury could infer that the defendants knew the horse had a dangerous or vicious disposition. Whether plaintiff is proceeding under Code § 105-110 (keeping a vicious or dangerous animal) or in fraud and deceit, proof of scienter is still essential to his case. Chandler v. Gately, 119 Ga. App. 513 (167 SE2d 697); Leatherwood v. Boomershine Motors, 53 Ga. App. 592 (186 SE 897).

The trial court erred in denying defendants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.

Judgment reversed.

Pannell and Quillian, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

172 S.E.2d 201, 120 Ga. App. 761, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-hurt-gactapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack