Legal Opinion

Barlow v. Lord

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 23, 1965No. 41404PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Deen, Judge.

1. Where a parent has no special reason to anticipate that a child, either through known dangerous proclivities or because of its possession of dangerous instrumentalities, may inflict harm on the person or property of others, mere failure to supervise the child’s play activities is not a failure to exercise ordinary care on the part of the parent so as to subject him to liability for an act not amounting to vandalism, which latter is a wilful, wanton, or intentional tort. Matthews v. Johnson, 100 Ga. App. 331 (111 SE2d 158); Assurance Co. of America v. Bell, 108 Ga. App. 766 (3)…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Griffin v. RussellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1915
  2. Assurance Co. of America v. BellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
  3. Spires v. GoldbergCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1921
  4. Milton Bradley Co. of Ga. v. CooperCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
  5. Lee Street Auto Sales, Inc. v. WarrenCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1960

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Glean v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  2. Chester v. EvansCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1967
  3. Muse v. OzmentCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
  4. Stephens v. StewartCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  5. Dent v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984

1 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