Lockett v. Belcher Heating & Plumbing Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Lockett v. Belcher Heating & Plumbing Co.

138 S.E. 286, 36 Ga. App. 815, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 332

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 12, 1927

Docket17828

StatusPublished

This text of 138 S.E. 286 (Lockett v. Belcher Heating & Plumbing Co.) 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

Lockett v. Belcher Heating & Plumbing Co., 138 S.E. 286, 36 Ga. App. 815, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 332 (Ga. Ct. App. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

Bell, J.

Under tlie evidence in this ease it was a jury question whether the driver of the automobile that struck and injured the plaintiff was negligent in driving it on the left side of the street and in not warning' the plaintiff by horn or other device of the approach of the automobile. The evidence was .conflicting as to whether the other side of the street was closed to traffic. There being evidence from which the jury could have inferred that the defendant’s servant who was driving the automobile was negligent "in one or more of the particulars charged, and the evidence not having disclosed any defensive facts from which it could be said as a matter of law that the plaintiff should not recover, the court erred in granting a nonsuit.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

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

Bell, J.

Under tlie evidence in this ease it was a jury question whether the driver of the automobile that struck and injured the plaintiff was negligent in driving it on the left side of the street and in not warning' the plaintiff by horn or other device of the approach of the automobile. The evidence was .conflicting as to whether the other side of the street was closed to traffic. There being evidence from which the jury could have inferred that the defendant’s servant who was driving the automobile was negligent "in one or more of the particulars charged, and the evidence not having disclosed any defensive facts from which it could be said as a matter of law that the plaintiff should not recover, the court erred in granting a nonsuit.

Judgment reversed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Stephens, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 S.E. 286, 36 Ga. App. 815, 1927 Ga. App. LEXIS 332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lockett-v-belcher-heating-plumbing-co-gactapp-1927.