Legal Opinion
Ford Motor Company v. Williams
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided November 12, 1963No. 22167PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Head, Presiding Justice.
The Code provides that every person shall be liable for torts committed by his servant by his command “or in the prosecution and within the scope o.f his business.” Code § 105-108. Construing this Code section, this court in Greeson v. Bailey, 167 Ga. 638 (146 SE 490), held: “If injury is done by the servant not in the prosecution or scope of his business, the master is not liable. . . The servant must be acting both in the prosecution and within the scope of his business.” See also Lee v. Nelms, 57 Ga. 253, 257 (2); Frazier v. Southern R. Co., 200 Ga. 590 (2) (37 SE2d…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Krueger v. MacDougaldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1918
- Frazier v. Southern Railway CompanySupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
- Greeson v. BaileySupreme Court of Georgia · 1929
- Toler v. GoodinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1946
- Wright v. HicksSupreme Court of Georgia · 1854
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Cabaniss v. HipsleyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
- Melton v. LaCalamitoCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1981
- Hunter v. A-1 Bonding Service, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
- Woodmen of the World Life Insurance Society v. EtheridgeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1967
- Peacock v. Retail Credit CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1969
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.