Blount v. Sutton
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Dissent
Pannell, Judge,
dissenting. 1. While the simple fact, standing alone, that one of the defendants was operating the automobile of the other defendant with such owner’s consent, is not sufficient to establish liability of the defendant owner for injuries to a third party occasioned by the negligence of the driver (Frankel v. Cone, 214 Ga. 733 (107 SE2d 819); Hines v. Bell, 104 Ga. App. 76 (4) (120 SE2d 892)); yet, where the owner is present in the automobile an inference may properly be drawn by the jury that the owner was in control of the operation of the automobile (Trawick v. Chambliss, 42…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Haas & Howell v. GodbyCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1924
- Hines v. BellCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Dixon v. Bristol Savings BankSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Frankel v. ConeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959
- Corcoran v. Merchants & Miners Transportation Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.