Williams v. East Coast Stages Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Williams v. East Coast Stages Co.

182 S.E. 415, 52 Ga. App. 77, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 44

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedNovember 2, 1935

Docket24887

StatusPublished

This text of 182 S.E. 415 (Williams v. East Coast Stages 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

Williams v. East Coast Stages Co., 182 S.E. 415, 52 Ga. App. 77, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 44 (Ga. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

G-ubrry, J.

1. While it may be true, under the rule that a common carrier for hire owes to its passengers the duty of extraordinary care for their safety, that it is its duty to inform passengers by either published or oral notice, of their route and necessary changes of cars in reaching their destination, yet a failure to comply with this duty and a consequent miscarriage of a passenger will not be held actionable unless it be shown that the passenger sought the information from the agents of the company and was not given it, either by a refusal or by negligence, or unless there appeared some circumstance excusing the failure to inquire. It is obvious in this case that the passenger by the exercise of ordinary care could have avoided the consequences of the defendant’s negligence, by the simple expedient of making inquiry. For these reasons the petition was defective, and was properly dismissed on general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and MacIntyre, J., coneur.

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

G-ubrry, J.

1. While it may be true, under the rule that a common carrier for hire owes to its passengers the duty of extraordinary care for their safety, that it is its duty to inform passengers by either published or oral notice, of their route and necessary changes of cars in reaching their destination, yet a failure to comply with this duty and a consequent miscarriage of a passenger will not be held actionable unless it be shown that the passenger sought the information from the agents of the company and was not given it, either by a refusal or by negligence, or unless there appeared some circumstance excusing the failure to inquire. It is obvious in this case that the passenger by the exercise of ordinary care could have avoided the consequences of the defendant’s negligence, by the simple expedient of making inquiry. For these reasons the petition was defective, and was properly dismissed on general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and MacIntyre, J., coneur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 S.E. 415, 52 Ga. App. 77, 1935 Ga. App. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-east-coast-stages-co-gactapp-1935.