Brown & Stephens Pipe Line Contractors, Inc. v. Shipp
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Eeerhardt, Judge.
We affirm the judgment complained of and hold that the case was properly one for jury determination. Although plaintiff’s testimony may have been vague and equivocal as to whether “the ditch” or “the indentation” which his automobile struck was the particular sewer depression which the defendant created, this is consistent with plaintiff’s theory of the case that he never saw the hazard because of the physical circumstances. Plaintiff did testify, however, that the left front tire of his automobile struck an indentation or hole in the right-hand lane near the center line,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Georgia Railway & Electric Co. v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Sixth Street Corporation v. DanielCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1950
- Stapleton v. StapletonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1953
- Wright Contracting Co. v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1954
- Liberty National Life Insurance v. LinerCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Carson v. ParksCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1977