Legal Opinion
Beadles v. Smith
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided April 25, 1962No. 39374PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Eberhardt, Judge.
The allegations of the petition were sufficient to withstand a general demurrer. Stanfield v. Johnson, 95 Ga. App. 349 (98 SE2d 106). A plaintiff is not ordinarily required to negative contributory negligence on his part in his petition. Central Ga. Elec. &c. Corp. v. Heath, 60 Ga. App. 649, 651 (4 SE2d 700). The contention that plaintiff’s husband could have avoided the consequences of defendant’s negligence by the exercise of ordinary care is not demanded as a matter of law from the facts pleaded, and is a matter of defense.
Special grounds of demurrer 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 101 and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Atlanta, Knoxville & Northern Railway Co. v. GardnerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1905
- Gulf Oil Corporation v. StanfieldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1957
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. PriorSupreme Court of Georgia · 1914
- Central Georgia Electric Membership Corp. v. HeathCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1939
- Wells v. SteinekCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Slaughter v. LinderCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- American Family Life Assurance Co. v. WelchCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969
- Lee v. PierceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1978