Legal Opinion

Hoover v. Southern Bell Telephone Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided February 22, 1935No. 23898Published

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

1. A subsequent intervening act of a third person does not bréale the causal connection between the defendant’s act of negligence and the plaintiff’s injury, where at the time of the occurrence of the defendant’s negligent act the defendant could reasonably have foreseen the intervening act, although it is not necessary that the particular manner in which the intervening act may happen should be foreseen or anticipated. Where the defendant, a telephone company, in violation of an ordinance of the city, had adjacent to one of its poles left a hole in a sidewalk large enough for a person to…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Southern Railway Co. v. WebbSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  2. Rollestone v. Cassirer & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
  3. McDowell v. Village of PrestonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
  4. Mayor of Unadilla v. FelderSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
  5. Barrett v. Mayor of SavannahCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1911

4 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