Stephens v. Stewart

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Stephens v. Stewart

168 S.E.2d 325, 119 Ga. App. 629, 6 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 680, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1191

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 18, 1969

Docket43584

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 168 S.E.2d 325 (Stephens v. Stewart) 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. Stewart, 168 S.E.2d 325, 119 Ga. App. 629, 6 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 680, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1191 (Ga. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Whitman, Judge.

The decision of this court in Stephens v. Stewart, 118 Ga. App. 811 (165 SE2d 572), has, upon certiorari, been affirmed in part and reversed in part. Stewart Stephens, 225 Ga. 185 (166 SE2d 890).

The judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this court. The ruling of these decisions as they pertain to this case is that the trial court did not err in denying defendant’s motion for directed verdict, but that it did err in charging the jury that it could impute a minor daughter’s negligence, if any, in the operation of a motor boat, to the defendant father on the basis of a Game and Fish Regulation promulgated under the Motor Boat Numbering Act of 1960.

In view of the erroneous charge, a new trial of the case is required.

Judgment reversed.

Felton, C. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.

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

Whitman, Judge.

The decision of this court in Stephens v. Stewart, 118 Ga. App. 811 (165 SE2d 572), has, upon certiorari, been affirmed in part and reversed in part. Stewart Stephens, 225 Ga. 185 (166 SE2d 890).

The judgment of this court is vacated, and the judgment of the Supreme Court is made the judgment of this court. The ruling of these decisions as they pertain to this case is that the trial court did not err in denying defendant’s motion for directed verdict, but that it did err in charging the jury that it could impute a minor daughter’s negligence, if any, in the operation of a motor boat, to the defendant father on the basis of a Game and Fish Regulation promulgated under the Motor Boat Numbering Act of 1960.

In view of the erroneous charge, a new trial of the case is required.

Judgment reversed.

Felton, C. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 S.E.2d 325, 119 Ga. App. 629, 6 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. (West) 680, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephens-v-stewart-gactapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack