Stephens v. Snyder

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stephens v. Snyder

14 S.E.2d 687, 65 Ga. App. 36, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 244

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 6, 1941

Docket28899.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 14 S.E.2d 687 (Stephens v. Snyder) 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

Stephens v. Snyder, 14 S.E.2d 687, 65 Ga. App. 36, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 244 (Ga. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Gardner, J.

In Stephens v. Snyder, 63 Ga. App. 90 (10 S. E. 2d, 218) this court affirmed the judgment of the trial court sustaining a demurrer and dismissing the action. Eeference is made to that decision for a full statement of the allegations of fact and the rulings. In the instant case the husband of the plaintiff in that case brought suit to recover special damages and general damages for loss of his wife’s services, based on the same transaction, save that there was some variation in the allegations of negligence as applied to the cause as amended, when it was alleged that the wife of the plaintiff was instructed to take the dress off, leaving her unassisted, while the saleslady went for another dress. Whatever might be the effect of the amendment, this case is nevertheless controlled by the ruling in Stephens v. Snyder, supra: “ Our view of this case is that the plaintiff’s injury was due to her negligence, assuming but not deciding that the defendant was negligent.” The court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Gardner, J.

In Stephens v. Snyder, 63 Ga. App. 90 (10 S. E. 2d, 218) this court affirmed the judgment of the trial court sustaining a demurrer and dismissing the action. Eeference is made to that decision for a full statement of the allegations of fact and the rulings. In the instant case the husband of the plaintiff in that case brought suit to recover special damages and general damages for loss of his wife’s services, based on the same transaction, save that there was some variation in the allegations of negligence as applied to the cause as amended, when it was alleged that the wife of the plaintiff was instructed to take the dress off, leaving her unassisted, while the saleslady went for another dress. Whatever might be the effect of the amendment, this case is nevertheless controlled by the ruling in Stephens v. Snyder, supra: “ Our view of this case is that the plaintiff’s injury was due to her negligence, assuming but not deciding that the defendant was negligent.” The court did not err in sustaining the demurrer to the petition.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, G. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 S.E.2d 687, 65 Ga. App. 36, 1941 Ga. App. LEXIS 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephens-v-snyder-gactapp-1941.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack