Legal Opinion

Savannah & Atlanta Railway Co. v. DeBusk

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided December 4, 1942No. 29733PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, P. J.

(After stating the foregoing facts.) 1. The judge should have stricken paragraph 5 (a, b) of the petition as amended, in which it was alleged that the defendant’s servants in charge of maintaining the roadbed and railroad tracks of the defendant where the mules were killed “planted, or negligently permitted to grow on said track and roadbed a luxuriant growth of Bermuda grass, which offered much better grazing for said mules than the adjacent lands which were covered with broom sedge; said grass served as a lure to entice said mules to come upon said track and graze.” While it is negligence…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. WallSupreme Court of Georgia · 1888
  2. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. ChurchillSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
  3. Macon & Birmingham Railroad v. RevisSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
  4. Western & Atlantic Railroad v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1914
  5. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Waxelbaum & Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1900

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Gordon v. Gulf American Fire & Casualty Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1966
  2. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
  3. Johnson v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1950
  4. Tennessee, Alabama & Georgia Railway Co. v. AndrewsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1968
  5. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. ScottCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1957

3 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