Legal Opinion
Townsend v. Georgia Power Co.
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Decided October 2, 1931No. 20966PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBell, J.
(After stating the foregoing facts.) Onr first opinion was that the petition set forth a cause of action, and we so held. We later granted a motion for a rehearing; and now, after further consideration, have reached an opposite conclusion.
The primary purpose of a street is for ordinary passage and travel by the general public, and “transportation of travelers or goods by common carriers does not fall within the ordinary way in which streets are used.” Simon v. Atlanta, 67 Ga. 618 (44 Am. R. 739); Schlesinger v. Atlanta, 161 Ga. 148 (2), 161 (129 S. E. 861). Municipal authorities have the…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Ring v. . City of CohoesNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Krueger v. MacDougaldSupreme Court of Georgia · 1918
- Stern v. International Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Schlesinger v. City of AtlantaSupreme Court of Georgia · 1925
- Dubois v. . City of KingstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Kicklighter v. SAVANNAH TRANSIT AUTHORITYCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1983
- Lenderman v. HaynieCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of Georgia · 1972
- Martin v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Butler v. City of AtlantaCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.