Legal Opinion

Howell v. Nance

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided May 11, 1922No. 12874PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Action for damages; from city court of Carrollton — Judge Hood. August 18, 1921.

1Opinion of the CourtLuke, J.

1. It was not error to charge the jury that “ when an automobile driver is approaching a pedestrian on a public street, it is his duty to warn them of his approach by the sounding of a horn, gong, or bell, and a failure to do so, under the law, would be negligence upon his part. The law makes it the duty of a driver of an automobile approaching a person from the rear to give notice of his approach.” Sheppard v. Johnson, 11 Ga. App. 280 (75 S. E. 348). The Sheppard case is apparently in conflict with O’Dowd v. Newnham, 13 Ga. App. *576220 (9) (80 S. E. 36), but we are bound by and must follow…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. O'Dowd v. NewnhamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
  2. Sheppard v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1912

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Healy, Admr. v. MooreSupreme Court of Vermont · 1936
  2. Lott v. HerrinCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API