Manglona v. Dodd

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Manglona v. Dodd

241 S.E.2d 17, 144 Ga. App. 338, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2692

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 15, 1977

Docket54474

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 241 S.E.2d 17 (Manglona v. Dodd) 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

Manglona v. Dodd, 241 S.E.2d 17, 144 Ga. App. 338, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2692 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977).

Pincite

Opinion

Banke, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict for the defendant-appellee in a rear-end collision case. The appellant argues that the evidence did not support the verdict.

The plaintiff-appellant was driving along a service road adjacent to a parking lot when he was hit from the rear by the appellee’s vehicle. The appellee stated that he had looked away from the road momentarily and that when he looked back the appellant had stopped in front of him. The appellant denied having stopped and stated that the appellee merely overtook him.

In rear-end collision cases, as in other negligence cases, the existence of liability is to be determined by a jury unless the issue is so clear that reasonable minds could not differ on it. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Jones, 236 Ga. 448 (224 SE2d 25) (1976); Powell v. Jackson, 142 Ga. App. 34 (234 SE2d 837) (1977). The evidence in this case is in conflict and does not demand a finding that the defendant was negligent or that, if he was, his negligence was the proximate cause of the collision. Accord, Garrett v. Royal Bros. Co., 225 Ga. 533 (170 SE2d 294) (1969). Therefore, the case was properly submitted to the jury, and the trial court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Shulman and Birdsong, JJ., concur.

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

Banke, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered on a jury verdict for the defendant-appellee in a rear-end collision case. The appellant argues that the evidence did not support the verdict.

The plaintiff-appellant was driving along a service road adjacent to a parking lot when he was hit from the rear by the appellee’s vehicle. The appellee stated that he had looked away from the road momentarily and that when he looked back the appellant had stopped in front of him. The appellant denied having stopped and stated that the appellee merely overtook him.

In rear-end collision cases, as in other negligence cases, the existence of liability is to be determined by a jury unless the issue is so clear that reasonable minds could not differ on it. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Jones, 236 Ga. 448 (224 SE2d 25) (1976); Powell v. Jackson, 142 Ga. App. 34 (234 SE2d 837) (1977). The evidence in this case is in conflict and does not demand a finding that the defendant was negligent or that, if he was, his negligence was the proximate cause of the collision. Accord, Garrett v. Royal Bros. Co., 225 Ga. 533 (170 SE2d 294) (1969). Therefore, the case was properly submitted to the jury, and the trial court did not err in overruling the motion for new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Shulman and Birdsong, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

241 S.E.2d 17, 144 Ga. App. 338, 1977 Ga. App. LEXIS 2692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manglona-v-dodd-gactapp-1977.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack