Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Hatcher

45 S.E. 239, 118 Ga. 273, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 527
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJune 30, 1903
StatusPublished
Cited by36 cases

This text of 45 S.E. 239 (Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Hatcher) 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
Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. Hatcher, 45 S.E. 239, 118 Ga. 273, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 527 (Ga. 1903).

Opinion

.Lamar, J.

The judgment of the court overruling the demurrer having been affirmed (S., F. & W. Ry. Co. v. Hatcher, 115 Ga. 379), on the trial the plaintiff recovered a verdict. Error is assigned because the court charged “sections 2322 and 3830 of the Civil Code in immediate connection with each other,' without other explanation as to the classes of cases to which each was applicable, when as a matter of law they should be applied to entirely different and distinct classes of cases.” This charge requires the grant of a new trial, under the' express rulings in Americus R. Co. v. Luckie, 87 Ga. 6, and Macon R. Co. v. Moore, 99 Ga. 229. Each of the two sections is very brief and condensed, requiring analysis and explanation in order to be understood by the jury; but to read the two sections in immediate connection is necessarily confusing. To tell the jury that if the plaintiff could have avoided the in jury "he could not recover, and in the same breath to say that if both parties are at fault the plaintiff’s damages may be diminished, is calculated to mislead and confuse them on a point about which they should be most carefully and accurately instructed. But the defendant in error insists that this error was cured in subsequent portions of the charge. The attention of the jury was not specially called to the fact that it was intended to correct what had been previously said. The jury must take the whole charge as the law, and it is not for them to select one part to the exclusion of another, nor to decide whether one part cures or qualifies another, without being instructed so to do by the judge. As to how such an error should be cured, see Americus R. Co. v. Luckie, supra.

Judgment reversed.

By five Justices.

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

Related

Whiteway Laundry & Dry Cleaners, Inc. v. Childs
191 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)
Sykes v. Carter
190 S.E.2d 623 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1972)
T. D. Slater Contracting Co. v. Williams
114 S.E.2d 448 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1960)
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Layne
77 S.E.2d 565 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
Potts v. Reconstruction Finance Corp.
47 S.E.2d 178 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1948)
Ault v. Whittemore
35 S.E.2d 526 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1945)
Mickle v. Moore
17 S.E.2d 728 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Bryant v. State
13 S.E.2d 820 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1941)
Southern Railway Co. v. Lee
200 S.E. 569 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Berry v. Jowers
200 S.E. 195 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1938)
Maner v. Dykes
190 S.E. 189 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)
Parker v. State
180 S.E. 390 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1935)
Pattillo v. Mangum
166 S.E. 641 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1932)
Rogers Inc. v. Sutton
162 S.E. 519 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1931)
Seaboard Air-Line Railway Co. v. Sarman
144 S.E. 810 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)
Gill v. Willingham
120 S.E. 108 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1923)
White v. State
100 S.E. 9 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1919)
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Deas
96 S.E. 267 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1918)
Kendrick v. High Shoals Manufacturing Co.
94 S.E. 287 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Andrews
93 S.E. 261 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
45 S.E. 239, 118 Ga. 273, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/savannah-florida-western-railway-co-v-hatcher-ga-1903.