West v. Smith & Kelly Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

West v. Smith & Kelly Co.

157 S.E. 261, 42 Ga. App. 653, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 90

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 14, 1931

Docket20734

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 157 S.E. 261 (West v. Smith & Kelly Co.) 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

West v. Smith & Kelly Co., 157 S.E. 261, 42 Ga. App. 653, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 90 (Ga. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Jenkins, P. J.

The plaintiff, an itinerant mender of chairs, solicited and obtained from defendants a chair to mend, and was permitted to take it into the basement of defendants’ place of business to mend it. Rinding it necessary to attend a call of nature, he went to a lavatory situated on the ba.sement floor but on a somewhat higher level, and on leaving the lavatory his foot caught in a “split place” on one of the steps leading from the lavatory to the basement floor, and this caused him to stumble and fall, and he thereby received injuries, for which he sued. The court sustained a general demurrer to his petition and dismissed it. Held: Whether or not the plaintiff, while in the basement for the purpose of carrying on the work undertaken for the defendants as an independent contractor, occupied the status of an invitee upon the premises, the invitation did not extend to any other portion of the premises, and in entering upon another portion of the premises he was at most a mere licensee. Smith v. Jewell Cotton Mill Co., 29 Ga. App. 461 (116 S. E. 17). The petition shows no breach of any duty owing by the defendants to the plaintiff as a licensee, and the court properly sustained the general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., eoneur.

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

Jenkins, P. J.

The plaintiff, an itinerant mender of chairs, solicited and obtained from defendants a chair to mend, and was permitted to take it into the basement of defendants’ place of business to mend it. Rinding it necessary to attend a call of nature, he went to a lavatory situated on the ba.sement floor but on a somewhat higher level, and on leaving the lavatory his foot caught in a “split place” on one of the steps leading from the lavatory to the basement floor, and this caused him to stumble and fall, and he thereby received injuries, for which he sued. The court sustained a general demurrer to his petition and dismissed it. Held: Whether or not the plaintiff, while in the basement for the purpose of carrying on the work undertaken for the defendants as an independent contractor, occupied the status of an invitee upon the premises, the invitation did not extend to any other portion of the premises, and in entering upon another portion of the premises he was at most a mere licensee. Smith v. Jewell Cotton Mill Co., 29 Ga. App. 461 (116 S. E. 17). The petition shows no breach of any duty owing by the defendants to the plaintiff as a licensee, and the court properly sustained the general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Stephens and Bell, JJ., eoneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 S.E. 261, 42 Ga. App. 653, 1931 Ga. App. LEXIS 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-smith-kelly-co-gactapp-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack