Moore v. Ross
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
1. In order to render a master liable for personal injuries to his servant, the injuries must have been received in the line of the servant’s duty. Atlanta &c. Ry. v. Ray, 70 Ga. 674 (4), 679: Whitton v. South Carolina &c. R. Co., 106 Ga. 796 (32 S. E. 857); Allen v. Hixson, 111 Ga. 460 (36 S. E. 810); Dellinger v. Elm City Cotton Mills, *51029 Ga. App. 127 (113 S. E. 702). But if the servant, in obedience to an express command of the master, or at the command or request of another servant having either express or implied authority to make such command or request, performs an act within the scope…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. YoungSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
- Moore v. Dublin Cotton MillsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. ReedCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1926
- Atlanta & Charlotte Air Line Railway v. RaySupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
- Allen v. HixsonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1900
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Chastain v. Fuqua Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- Liberty Mutual Insurance v. NealCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Jordan v. BatayiasCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936