Southern Railway Co. v. Pool

34 S.E. 141, 108 Ga. 808, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 456
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided July 27, 1899·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Lewis, J.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.

When a horse in a city, town, or village is quietly grazing on an unused street between the railroad-track and a barbed-wire fence near by, in plain view of the employees of the railroad company having control of an approaching train, the company is liable to the owner of the animal for injuries it sustains in consequence of being frightened by the wanton, unnecessary, and unusual blowing of the locomotive whistle which causes the animal to become injured by running into the fence. There was evidence to sustain this theory of the plaintiff’s case, and the court therefore did not err in overruling defendant’s petition for certiorari on the ground that the verdict of the jury in the justice’s court was contrary to evidence. Georgia Railroad v. Carr. 73 Ga. 558; Morgan v. Central Railroad, 77 Ga. 788, 792; Atlanta & W. P. R. Co. v. Hudson, 62 Ga. 680.

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

Southern Railway Co. v. Pool, 34 S.E. 141, 108 Ga. 808, 1899 Ga. LEXIS 456 (Ga. 1899).

34 S.E. 141 (Southern Railway Co. v. Pool) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chicago, R.I. P. R. Co. v. Hine
1916 OK 651 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1916)
Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Parish
87 S.E. 1095 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1916)
Chalkley v. Central of Georgia Railway Co.
48 S.E. 194 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Coleman v. Wrightsville & Tennille Railroad
40 S.E. 247 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1901)