Rodgers v. Watson

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Rodgers v. Watson

45 S.E.2d 708, 76 Ga. App. 220, 1947 Ga. App. LEXIS 411

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 2, 1947

Docket31815.

StatusPublished

This text of 45 S.E.2d 708 (Rodgers v. Watson) 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

Rodgers v. Watson, 45 S.E.2d 708, 76 Ga. App. 220, 1947 Ga. App. LEXIS 411 (Ga. Ct. App. 1947).

Pincite

Opinion

Gardner, J.

As against a general demurrer the' petition set' out a cause of action. We have set out the petition so that it may speak for itself and save us from analyzing it in great detail. We might call attention, however to only a few of the allegations in the petition which we think áre pertinent and have saving averments as against a general demurrer. It will be noted that in paragraph 3 it is alleged that the plaintiff was operating her car “in a careful and prudent manner at a speed not exceeding 25 miles per hour,” and that the defendant within approximately 60 feet from her, going in the opposite direction, suddenly turned his car, without warning, to the defendant’s left *222 and onto the left side of the road in the path of the car of the plaintiff which acts of the defendant caused the damage. The allegations of the petition, even though construed most strongly against the plaintiff, to say the least, leave reasonable grounds for two opinions, which should have been submitted to the jury as a question of fact for them and not a question of law for the courts.

There are no contentions presented by either party as to any question of law regarding tort actions. Hence, it would be useless to cite any decisions. The only question is a construction to be placed upon the allegations of the petition as a whole.

The court erred in sustaining the general demurrer, and in dismissing the petition.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur.

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

Gardner, J.

As against a general demurrer the' petition set' out a cause of action. We have set out the petition so that it may speak for itself and save us from analyzing it in great detail. We might call attention, however to only a few of the allegations in the petition which we think áre pertinent and have saving averments as against a general demurrer. It will be noted that in paragraph 3 it is alleged that the plaintiff was operating her car “in a careful and prudent manner at a speed not exceeding 25 miles per hour,” and that the defendant within approximately 60 feet from her, going in the opposite direction, suddenly turned his car, without warning, to the defendant’s left *222 and onto the left side of the road in the path of the car of the plaintiff which acts of the defendant caused the damage. The allegations of the petition, even though construed most strongly against the plaintiff, to say the least, leave reasonable grounds for two opinions, which should have been submitted to the jury as a question of fact for them and not a question of law for the courts.

There are no contentions presented by either party as to any question of law regarding tort actions. Hence, it would be useless to cite any decisions. The only question is a construction to be placed upon the allegations of the petition as a whole.

The court erred in sustaining the general demurrer, and in dismissing the petition.

Judgment reversed.

MacIntyre, P. J., and Townsend, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

45 S.E.2d 708, 76 Ga. App. 220, 1947 Ga. App. LEXIS 411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rodgers-v-watson-gactapp-1947.