Legal Opinion

Etheridge Motors, Inc. v. Haynie

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided April 2, 1963No. 39998, 40011PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

•Eberhardt, Judge.

The motion was granted on ground 5 only, wherein error was assigned upon the charge that “if the plaintiff, by the exercise of ordinary care, and by the use of his sight, could have avoided the negligence of the defendant, if any, and if you find from the'evidence in this case that the plaintiff herein has failed to use his sense of sight, then he could not be entitled to recover, even though you might find that the defendant was negligent.” (Emphasis added). Apparently the trial judge concluded that this charge had the effect, in the event the jury should find that the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hunt v. PollardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
  2. Etheridge Motors, Inc. v. HaynieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
  3. Herrin v. LámarCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  4. Carmichael v. SilversCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Seabolt v. CheesboroughCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
  2. CHAFFIN v. BLOOMIN BRANDS INCDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · 2023
  3. Dowis v. McCurdyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  4. Dowis v. McCurdyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  5. Northern Freight Lines, Inc. v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1963

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API