Tatum v. Pruitt
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Eberhardt, Judge.
We can find nothing in the evidence to support a finding of gross negligence against the Tatums. The only act of negligence supported, as we see it, is a possible exceeding of the city speed limit. That alone is not enough. Southern R. Co. v. Davis, 132 Ga. 812, 817 (65 SE 131); Peavy v. Peavy, 36 Ga. App. 202, 205 (136 SE 96); Hopkins v. Sipe, 58 Ga. App. 511, 513 (199 SE 246); Fletcher v. Abbott, 92 Ga. App. 364, 370 (88 SE2d 445) (dissenting opinion).
Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying the motion for judgment non obstante veredicto and the judgment is reversed…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Southern Railway Co. v. DavisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1909
- Peavy v. PeavyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
- Hopkins v. SipeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1938
- Fletcher v. AbbottCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1955
3Cited by3 opinions
- Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. OdomCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Co. v. OdomCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1979
- Whisnant v. WhisnantCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967