Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Phinazee
Supreme Court of Georgia
Action foi’ damages. Before Judge Jenkins. Bibb superior, court. November term, 1892.
1Opinion of the Court
Bleckley, Chief Justice.
1. There is no less scepticism in law than-in theology. ,This court is called upon again and again for a fresh revelation of some legal truth which has already been revealed. After the cases of Macon and Augusta R. R. Co. v. Mayes, 49 Ga. 355, Singleton v. Southwestern R. R. Co., 70 Ga., 464, and Chattanooga, Rome and Columbus R. R. Co. v. Liddell, 85 Ga. 482, it would seem that there could be no reasonable doubt of the liability of a chartered railroad company permitting another company to run *489trains over its railway, and thus to use its franchise, to respond for any…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Singleton v. Southwestern RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1883
- Macon & Augusta Railroad v. Moses & MayesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1873
- Chattanooga, Rome & Columbus Railroad Co. v. LiddellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
- Ivey v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1857
3Cited by19 opinions
- Powell v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1897
- Rollestone v. Cassirer & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1907
- Denver & R. G. R. v. RodderCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1900
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. LeonardCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1934
- Georgia Railroad & Banking Co. v. HaasSupreme Court of Georgia · 1906
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.