Williams v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Williams v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co.

121 S.E. 700, 31 Ga. App. 688, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 128

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 27, 1924

Docket14616

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 121 S.E. 700 (Williams v. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway 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. Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co., 121 S.E. 700, 31 Ga. App. 688, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 128 (Ga. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. Where a servant, while in the discharge of the duties of his employment, in descending from a lamp-post with a heavy lamp upon his arm, slips and falls upon an iron pipe and is injured, any insecurity in the place by reason of negligent maintenance of tne post with the lowest step at a height of from four to five feet from the ground, or of an iron pipe protruding above the ground at the base of the post, is [689]*689as obvious to the servant as to the master. This is true despite any assumption of tne risk by the master in giving assurances of safety to the servant. Civil Code (1910), § 3131. Elliot v. Tiflon Mill & Gin Co., 12 Ga. App. 498 (77 S. E. 667).

Decided February 27, 1924.

Action for damages; from city court of Macon—Judge Gunn. April 2, 1923.

E. W. Maynard, Frank F. Herndon, James Eugene Horne, for plaintiff. ‘ J. E. Hall, O. J. Bloch, for defendant.

2. Erom the allegation of the petition in this case it appears that in view of such obvious danger, the servant, by the exercise of ordinary care, could have avoided the consequences of the master’s negligence. No cause of action was shown, and the demurrer to the petition was properly sustained.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

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

Stephens, J.

1. Where a servant, while in the discharge of the duties of his employment, in descending from a lamp-post with a heavy lamp upon his arm, slips and falls upon an iron pipe and is injured, any insecurity in the place by reason of negligent maintenance of tne post with the lowest step at a height of from four to five feet from the ground, or of an iron pipe protruding above the ground at the base of the post, is [689]*689as obvious to the servant as to the master. This is true despite any assumption of tne risk by the master in giving assurances of safety to the servant. Civil Code (1910), § 3131. Elliot v. Tiflon Mill & Gin Co., 12 Ga. App. 498 (77 S. E. 667).

Decided February 27, 1924.

Action for damages; from city court of Macon—Judge Gunn. April 2, 1923.

E. W. Maynard, Frank F. Herndon, James Eugene Horne, for plaintiff. ‘ J. E. Hall, O. J. Bloch, for defendant.

2. Erom the allegation of the petition in this case it appears that in view of such obvious danger, the servant, by the exercise of ordinary care, could have avoided the consequences of the master’s negligence. No cause of action was shown, and the demurrer to the petition was properly sustained.

Judgment affirmed.

Jenkins, P. J., and Bell, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 S.E. 700, 31 Ga. App. 688, 1924 Ga. App. LEXIS 128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-georgia-southern-florida-railway-co-gactapp-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack