Tatum v. Pruitt

129 S.E.2d 388, 107 Ga. App. 172, 1962 Ga. App. LEXIS 599
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided September 20, 1962·No. 39738·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Eberhardt, Judge.

We can find nothing in the evidence to support a finding of gross negligence against the Tatums. The only act of negligence supported, as we see it, is a possible exceeding of the city speed limit. That alone is not enough. Southern R. Co. v. Davis, 132 Ga. 812, 817 (65 SE 131); Peavy v. Peavy, 36 Ga. App. 202, 205 (136 SE 96); Hopkins v. Sipe, 58 Ga. App. 511, 513 (199 SE 246); Fletcher v. Abbott, 92 Ga. App. 364, 370 (88 SE2d 445) (dissenting opinion).

Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment non obstante veredicto and the judgment is reversed with direction that a judgment non obstante veredicto be granted as to plaintiffs in error.

Judgment reversed with direction.

Carlisle, P. J., and Bus-sell, J., concur.

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

Tatum v. Pruitt, 129 S.E.2d 388, 107 Ga. App. 172, 1962 Ga. App. LEXIS 599 (Ga. Ct. App. 1962).

129 S.E.2d 388 (Tatum v. Pruitt) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. Odom
263 S.E.2d 469 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Whisnant v. Whisnant
158 S.E.2d 693 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1967)