King v. King
Opinion
In this action by a servant against the master, a house mover, for personal injuries received by the servant when he was on top of a house while it was being moved under high voltage wires, there was sufficient evidence to raise factual issues as to whether the master had provided against the dangers of the operation sufficiently to comply with the requirements found in Ga. L. 1960, p. 181 et seq. (Code Ann. §§ 34B-202, 34B-203), and as to whether the servant had assumed the risk involved; consequently denial of defendant’s motions for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial was not error.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
186 S.E.2d 432 (King v. King) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.