Southern Railway Co. v. Rice

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Southern Railway Co. v. Rice

98 S.E. 356, 23 Ga. App. 395, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 136

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 11, 1919

Docket9727

StatusPublished

This text of 98 S.E. 356 (Southern Railway Co. v. Rice) 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. Rice, 98 S.E. 356, 23 Ga. App. 395, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 136 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

Opinion

Broyles, P. J.

1. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, failed to show any negligence on the part of the defendant which contributed to the injuries suéd for. Moreover, it showed that the plaintiff, by the exercise of ordinary care, could have avoided the injuries. It follows that the recovery for the plaintiff was unauthorized, and that the court erred in overruling the general grounds of the defendant’s motion for a new trial. ■

2. The foregoing ruling being controlling in the case, it is unnecessary to consider the exceptions pendente lite or the special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth, J., concurs. Stephens, J., disqualified.

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

Broyles, P. J.

1. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, failed to show any negligence on the part of the defendant which contributed to the injuries suéd for. Moreover, it showed that the plaintiff, by the exercise of ordinary care, could have avoided the injuries. It follows that the recovery for the plaintiff was unauthorized, and that the court erred in overruling the general grounds of the defendant’s motion for a new trial. ■

2. The foregoing ruling being controlling in the case, it is unnecessary to consider the exceptions pendente lite or the special grounds of the motion for a new trial.

Judgment reversed.

Bloodworth, J., concurs. Stephens, J., disqualified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

98 S.E. 356, 23 Ga. App. 395, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 136, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southern-railway-co-v-rice-gactapp-1919.