Turner v. Seville Gin & Warehouse Co.

56 S.E. 739, 127 Ga. 555, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 426
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedFebruary 14, 1907
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 56 S.E. 739 (Turner v. Seville Gin & Warehouse Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Turner v. Seville Gin & Warehouse Co., 56 S.E. 739, 127 Ga. 555, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 426 (Ga. 1907).

Opinion

Lumpkin, J.

Turner • brought suit against the Seville Gin & Warehouse Company, seeking to recover damages for a personal injury. lie alleged, that under the command of the superintendent of the defendant he was throwing on the brushes of one of the gins certain particles of cotton; that the gin was supplied with a sliding or revolving “mote-board,” which was on the opposite side of the gin from him, and of which he did not know, and was not warned, and that it was liable to be pushed against his hand by any person passing. As to the manner in which the injury actually occurred, the petition alleged, that “One Cason, a coemployee, and engaged at work in said ginnery, suddenly, and without warning to petitioner, wrongfully and negligently shoved the said mote-board against the hand of petitioner, causing said mote-board to violently strike the hand of petitioner in such a manner as to bring petitioner’s said hand in contact with the saws of said gin, which were revolving with great velocity, thereby cutting and lacerating petitioner’s right hand and arm,” etc. From this statement it will appear that no latent defect in the machinery was alleged; nor did the injury occur by reason of dangers incident to the employment unknown to the servant and of which the master knew or ought to have known; nor was the “mote-board” pushed against the plaintiff’s hand by a mere passing person. But the petition showed on its face that the injury to the plaintiff occurred solely from the negligence of a coemployee, who wrongfully and negligently shoved the board against his hand. Under the allegations of this petition, there was no error in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the case. Civil Code, §§3610, 3030; Crown Cotton Mills v. McNally, 133 Ga. 35.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., •absent.

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

Related

Roland v. Tift
63 S.E. 133 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1908)
Wilder v. Miller
57 S.E. 309 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1907)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
56 S.E. 739, 127 Ga. 555, 1907 Ga. LEXIS 426, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-seville-gin-warehouse-co-ga-1907.