South Georgia Railway Co. v. Niles

Supreme Court of Georgia

South Georgia Railway Co. v. Niles

62 S.E. 1042, 131 Ga. 599, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 160

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedNovember 24, 1908

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 62 S.E. 1042 (South Georgia Railway Co. v. Niles) 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

South Georgia Railway Co. v. Niles, 62 S.E. 1042, 131 Ga. 599, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 160 (Ga. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Beck, J.

1. It appearing from tlie petition that at the time of the death of the plaintiff’s son he was in the employment of the defendant company as a brakeman and switchman on a freight-train, and that the negligence of the other employees of the company was the proximate cause of her son’s death, the latter himself being in the discharge of his duties and free from- fault and not guilty of any negligence contributing to his death; and it further appearing that the plaintiff was a widow dependent upon the deceased for a support, and' that he contributed towards her support, a general demurrer to the petition was properly overruled.

2. Such of the special demurrers as were meritorious were met by appropriate amendments.

3. That certain testimony was admitted over the objection, duly urged, . that the testimony was hearsay, will not require the granting of a new trial, it appearing that the evidence, though subject to the objection made, could not have affected the verdict rendered.

4. Under all the evidence in the case, the question as to whether the negligence of other employees of the defendant company was the proximate cause of the death of plaintiff’s son, and whether the deceased was in the exercise of due diligence and free from fault at the time of his death, were questions for the jury; arid there being some evidence . to support their finding, and no errors of law. hurtful to the defendant having been made to appeal', a new trial will not be granted.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Beck, J.

1. It appearing from tlie petition that at the time of the death of the plaintiff’s son he was in the employment of the defendant company as a brakeman and switchman on a freight-train, and that the negligence of the other employees of the company was the proximate cause of her son’s death, the latter himself being in the discharge of his duties and free from- fault and not guilty of any negligence contributing to his death; and it further appearing that the plaintiff was a widow dependent upon the deceased for a support, and' that he contributed towards her support, a general demurrer to the petition was properly overruled.

2. Such of the special demurrers as were meritorious were met by appropriate amendments.

3. That certain testimony was admitted over the objection, duly urged, . that the testimony was hearsay, will not require the granting of a new trial, it appearing that the evidence, though subject to the objection made, could not have affected the verdict rendered.

4. Under all the evidence in the case, the question as to whether the negligence of other employees of the defendant company was the proximate cause of the death of plaintiff’s son, and whether the deceased was in the exercise of due diligence and free from fault at the time of his death, were questions for the jury; arid there being some evidence . to support their finding, and no errors of law. hurtful to the defendant having been made to appeal', a new trial will not be granted.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

62 S.E. 1042, 131 Ga. 599, 1908 Ga. LEXIS 160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/south-georgia-railway-co-v-niles-ga-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack