Legal Opinion
Garrett v. Royal Brothers Co.
Supreme Court of Georgia
Decided September 8, 1969No. 25212PublishedCited by 52 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Nichols, Justice.
The gist of the holding of the Court of Appeals is that the mere striking of a fixed object with an automobile is negligence as a matter of law and the burden of proof of any damages in any way resulting therefrom was not proximately caused by the person operating such vehicle is upon the defendant.
In Barrett v. Mayor &c. of Savannah, 13 Ga. App. 86 (2) (78 SE 827), the Court of Appeals held: “No act can be affirmed to be negligence, as a matter of law, unless it has been made so by statute.” No citation of authority .was given for such statement, for indeed none was…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Wright v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1866
- City of Columbus v. OgletreeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
- Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. McKenneySupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Portner Brewing Co. v. CooperSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
- Dixon v. DixonCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by52 opinions
- Wakefield v. AR Winter Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1970
- Ford Motor Co. v. CarterSupreme Court of Georgia · 1977
- Housing Authority of Atlanta v. FambleCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1984
- Venable v. BlockCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance v. McGivernCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1974
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.