Legal Opinion

Elrod v. King

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 5, 1961No. 39134PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Bell, Judge.

In the amended petition it was charged, “The defendant Mechanical Service Company had actual knowledge after installation that the blower control system was not functioning in a usual and proper manner, and in spite of such knowledge it failed and neglected to- either correct said malfunction or to warn the plaintiff of the danger thereof.” (Emphasis added.)

The defendants York Corporation and Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co. contend that, construing the petition against the pleader on general demurrer, it clearly appears that the direct and proximate cause of the damage to the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Kuhr Bros., Inc. v. SpahosCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
  2. Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. ReevesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
  3. Hubbard v. Macon Railway & Light Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  4. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Davis & BrandonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  5. Charleston & Western Carolina Railway Co. v. AttawayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Yale & Towne, Inc. v. SharpeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  2. Griffith v. Chevrolet Motor Division of General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
  3. General Motors Corporation v. JenkinsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
  4. Foremost-McKesson Corp. v. Allied Chemical Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1983
  5. Garrett v. Panacon Corp.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1974

3 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