Legal Opinion

Smith v. Noxon Rug Mills, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 6, 1964No. 40625PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The defendant Smith contends in support of the general grounds of his motion for new trial, as well as in support of his motion for a judgment non obstante veredicto, that the evidence shows that the plaintiff’s damages were caused by the negligence of the defendants Thomason and Hackney. It is contended that if these defendants were independent contractors the defendant Smith cannot be held liable for their negligence since the work done does not come within any exception stated by Code § 105-502, and if they were merely employees of Smith then the verdict…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Southern Railway Co. v. HarbinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
  2. Bell & Son v. Kidd & RobertsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1909
  3. Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. HughesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Whitaker v. Harvell-Kilgore Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
  2. Shetter v. Davis Bros.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1982
  3. Noxon Rug Mills, Inc. v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1964
  4. Harold Glenn Whitaker v. Harvell-Kilgore Corporation and Day & Zimmerman, Inc., Lura Madden Whitaker v. Harvell-Kilgore Corporation and Day & Zimmerman, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
  5. Shetter v. Davis Bros.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1982

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