Seaboard Coast Line Railroad v. Thomas
Court of Appeals of Georgia
1Opinion of the Court
Deen, Judge.
The defendant complains that the court refused its requested charge: "There rested upon plaintiff a duty to exercise ordinary care for his own safety, being just such care as an ordinarily prudent person would exercise under the same or similar circumstances. Failure to exercise ordinary care for his own safety would constitute negli*718gence.” This is of course a standard instruction in an ordinary negligence action. The court charge that common carriers are liable to their employees for injury resulting in whole or in part from the negligence of the defendant; that contributory…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Eichel v. New York Central RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Young v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1970
- Jackson v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1969
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- City Council of Augusta v. LeeCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1980
- Bailey v. ToddCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
- Wilmock, Inc. v. FrenchCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
- Atlanta & West Point Railroad v. ArmstrongCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1976
- Hepner v. Southern Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1987
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.