Legal Opinion

Davenport v. Waters

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided June 12, 1929No. 19601PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBroyles, C. J.

Error is assigned upon the following charge: “If it affirmatively appears, from the evidence, that the plaintiff, Davenport, did not use ordinary care and diligence to discover the approach of defendant’s train upon its track before he attempted to cross said track at the crossing, then he can not recover for any alleged negligence of the defendant or the defendant’s employees.” Almost immediately preceding this charge the court charged as follows: “If you find, from the evidence, that the defendant’s employees were negligent in any of the particulars alleged in the petition, and that such…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Southern Railway Co. v. HarbinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1910
  2. Etheridge v. HobbsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1886
  3. Bryson v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1908
  4. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. BradshawCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1925
  5. Southern Railway Co. v. DavenportCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1929

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Evans v. CaldwellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1936
  2. Veal v. BarberSupreme Court of Georgia · 1944
  3. Cohen v. SappCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1964
  4. Dow v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Tarrant v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1940

2 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