Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Morse

84 S.E. 428, 143 Ga. 110, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 311
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 10, 1915
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 84 S.E. 428 (Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Morse) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Morse, 84 S.E. 428, 143 Ga. 110, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 311 (Ga. 1915).

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. Where personal property belonging”to a partnership composed of two persons was destroyed by fire through the negligence of a railroad company, which consisted in a failure to properly equip its engines with suitable spark-arresters and other essential equipment of locomotive steam-engines, and subsequently to the commission of the tort resulting in the destruction of the property one of the partners died, the surviving partner could by suit enforce the liability of the railroad company for the tort as a surviving partner, without joining in the action the personal representative of the deceased partner, it appearing that it was expressly stipulated in the articles of partnership that in ease of the death of either partner the other partner should have the authority to wind up the affairs of the partnership.

(a) Whether or not without such provision in the articles of partnership the surviving partner alone could enforce the liability by action it is not necessary to consider.

(b) The court declines upon review to reverse the ruling in the case of City of Atlanta v. Dooly, 74 Ga. 702.

2. Where an insurance company had paid to the owners of the property destroyed an amount for insurance, not exceeding the value of the property, and the plaintiff, the surviving partner in this case, in instituting action to recover damages against the tort-feasor in an amount equal to the insurance made the insurance company the usee in the suit, this did not furnish ground of complaint to the railroad company, whether the, insurance company would have been entitled to recover under the application of the doctrine of subrogation or not.

(a) Whether the case of Holcomb v. Richmond &c. Railroad Co., 78 Ga. 776 (3 S. E. 755), is sound in all of its rulings or not, as to its authority for the ruling allowing this suit in the name of the owner of [111]*111the property destroyed, for the use of the insurance company, the court thinks it is sound, and declines, upon review, to reverse the ruling upon that point.

February 10, 1915. Action, for damages. Before Judge Walker. Wilkes superior court. January 29, 1914. Joseph B. & Bryan Gumming and Howard & Slaton, for plaintiffs in error. Samuel H. Sibley and G. H. & B. S. Gohen, contra.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.

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

Related

Browder v. Cox
64 S.E.2d 460 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Gray v. Marrs
1938 OK 462 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1938)
Bone v. Faircloth
182 S.E. 400 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Cook v. Cochran
156 S.E. 465 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Greene & Co.
154 S.E. 809 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
American Surety Co. v. County of Bibb
134 S.E. 100 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1926)
Irvin v. New Brunswick Fire Insurance
122 S.E. 710 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Darley v. Ehrlich & Co.
122 S.E. 249 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)
Atlanta Cadillac Co. v. Manley
116 S.E. 35 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1923)
Hillyer v. Magruder
103 S.E. 738 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1920)
Sullivan v. Curling
99 S.E. 533 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
84 S.E. 428, 143 Ga. 110, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/louisville-nashville-railroad-v-morse-ga-1915.