Southern Railway Co. v. Davenport

148 S.E. 171, 39 Ga. App. 645, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 484
CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia
DecidedApril 16, 1929
Docket19443
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 148 S.E. 171 (Southern Railway Co. v. Davenport) 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
Southern Railway Co. v. Davenport, 148 S.E. 171, 39 Ga. App. 645, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 484 (Ga. Ct. App. 1929).

Opinion

Broyles, C. J.

1. A railway company and its engineer may be jointly sued for the negligent infliction of personal injuries, where the negligence of the company results solely from the act and conduct of the engineer. Southern Railway Co. v. Grizzle, 124 Ga. 735 (2) (53 S. E. 244, 110 Am. St. R. 191).

2. In a joint action against a railway company and its .engineer, to recover damages for the infliction of personal injuries upon the plaintiff solely in consequence of the engineer’s negligence, a verdict finding the engineer not liable, but finding in favor of the plaintiff against the railway company, is unauthorized and should be set aside. Southern Ry. Co. v. Harbin, 135 Ga. 122 (68 S. E. 1103, 30 L. R. A. (N. S.) 404, 21 Ann. Cas. 1011); Salmon v. Southern Ry. Co., 137 Ga. 636 (73 S. E. 1062).

3. The instant case is a joint action against the railway company and its engineer for the negligent infliction of personal injuries upon the plaintiff. The petition, properly construed, most strongly against the plaintiff, shows that the injuries sued for were caused solely by the negligence of the engineer. Eurthermore, upon the trial of the case there was no evidence that authorized a finding that any other employee or agent of the railway company was guilty of any negligence that contributed to the plaintiff’s injuries. Accordingly, under the above-stated ruling, the verdict, which exonerated the engineer and held the railway company liable, was unauthorized, and the court erred in- refusing to grant a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Luke and Bloodworth, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Adams v. Morgan
150 S.E.2d 556 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1966)
Kolodkin v. Griffin
75 S.E.2d 197 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1953)
RELIABLE TRANSFER CO. INC. v. Gabriel
65 S.E.2d 679 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1951)
Dixie Ohio Express Co. v. Poston
170 F.2d 446 (Fifth Circuit, 1948)
Southern Railway Co. v. Nix
8 S.E.2d 409 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1940)
Roadway Express Inc. v. McBroom
6 S.E.2d 460 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1939)
Southern Railway Co. v. Smith
191 S.E. 181 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1937)
Davenport v. Waters
148 S.E. 772 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
148 S.E. 171, 39 Ga. App. 645, 1929 Ga. App. LEXIS 484, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-co-v-davenport-gactapp-1929.