Western & Atlantic R. R. v. Patillo
24 S.E. 958, 99 Ga. 97
Opinion
The action being for damages resulting from personal injuries, and the plaintiff having neither alleged nor proved 'anything as to lost time, it was error to charge that the plaintiff “would be entitled to recover, also, for lost time in consequence of the injury sustained,” and that the jury could “‘look to the ■evidence and see how much time he did lose, and what his time was worth.”
2. There was no error other than that above indicated which would require the granting of a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Western & Atlantic R. R. v. Patillo, 24 S.E. 958, 99 Ga. 97 (Ga. 1896).
24 S.E. 958 (Western & Atlantic R. R. v. Patillo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Sinclair Refining Co. v. Tompkins
117 F.2d 596 (Fifth Circuit, 1941)
Southern Grocery Stores Inc. v. Hollis
173 S.E. 182 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1934)
Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway Co. v. Miller
47 S.E. 959 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1904)
Western Union Tel. Co. v. Morris
83 F. 992 (Eighth Circuit, 1897)