Southern Railway Co. v. Daniell
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Townsend, Judge.
It is the contention of the defendant that it is entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict because the evidence demands a finding that the plaintiff’s injuries proximately resulted from his own lack of ordinary care for his safety. The evidence shows that the train crew had been engaged in switching operations and that the engine, which had been disconnected from the cars, had been motionless for a few minutes prior to the collision; that its motor was running, which the plaintiff knew when he entered his automobile because he heard it; that when the plaintiff turned…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Smith v. American Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1948
- Jones v. HutchinsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. ThomasCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1951
- Willis v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Western & Atlantic Railroad v. SmithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1916
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Hunt v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Underwood v. Atlanta & West Point RailroadCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. PrestonKentucky Supreme Court · 2000
- Atlanta Metallic Casket Co. v. HollingsworthCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
- Seaboard Coast Line Railroad v. DaughertyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.