Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Nanny

73 S.E. 1052, 137 Ga. 607, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 105
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided February 16, 1912·Published

Opinion

Atkinson, J.

1. A landlord can not recover in a suit for damages against a railroad company for failure to keep in good repair a Stock-guard, where the sole damage alleged is to the crop of a tenant.

2. The right of action given by the Civil Code, §§ 2699 et seq., is a statutory right, and applies only to the owner of the land, and not to a tenant. Florida etc. R. Co. v. Judge, 100 Ga. 600 (28 S. E. 379); Hardin v. Chattanooga Southern R. Co., 113 Ga. 357 (38 S. E. 839); Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Fowler, 104 Ga. 148 (30 S. E. 243); Southern R. Co. v. Harrell, 104 Ga. 602 (30 S. E. 821).

3. Under the principles above announced, and the former decisions of this court, the action was subject to general demurrer.

Judgment reversed.

All the Justices concur, except Bill, J., not presiding.

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

Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Nanny, 73 S.E. 1052, 137 Ga. 607, 1912 Ga. LEXIS 105 (Ga. 1912).

73 S.E. 1052 (Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Nanny) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad v. Judge
28 S.E. 379 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1897)
Alabama Great Southern R. R. v. Fowler
30 S.E. 243 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Southern Railway Co. v. Harrell
30 S.E. 821 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1898)
Hardin v. Chattanooga Southern Railroad
38 S.E. 839 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)