Southern Gas Corporation v. Cowan
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtFelton, C. J.
It is contended that the evidence did not authorize the findings that Bowman was an employee of South ern Gas Corporation, and that at the time of the collision he was within the scope of his employment. The contention is without merit. Where an automobile is involved in a collision, and it is shown that the automobile is owned by a person, and that the operator of the automobile is in the employment of that person, a presumption arises that the employee was in the scope of his employment at the time of the collision, and the burden is then on the defendant employer to show that at the time…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dawson Motor Co. v. PettyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Stenger v. MitchellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1944
- Fambro v. SparksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1952
- Abelman v. OrmondCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
- Davies v. HearnCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Price v. Star Service & Petroleum Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Parks v. FullerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1959
- Johnstown Financial Corp. v. RoperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- Hankerson v. HammettCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 2007
- Short v. MillerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.