Legal Opinion

Maulding v. Atlanta Transit System, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided January 12, 1960No. 38001PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Nichols, Judge.

The general grounds of the amended motion for a new trial have not been argued and are consequently abandoned. Special ground 4 complains that the court erred in giving the following charge to the jury: “I charge you, Gentlemen, that even if you find that the defendant was guilty of some negligence, but you also find that the plaintiff, Joseph Don Maulding, was guilty of negligence and that said plaintiff’s negligence was equal to or greater than the negligence of the defendant, then I charge you that the plaintiff, Joseph Don Maulding, cannot recover and your verdict would be…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Limbert v. BishopCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957
  2. Baggett v. JacksonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
  3. Georgia & Florida Railway v. NewtonSupreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  4. Tifton Brick & Block Co. v. MeadowCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1955
  5. Bush v. SkeltonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Schroeder v. Hunter Douglas, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
  2. Palm Beach County Bd. of Com'rs v. SalasSupreme Court of Florida · 1987
  3. Connell v. RigginsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006
  4. Turner v. WeaverCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API