Legal Opinion

George A. Hormel & Co. v. General Motors Truck Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided March 11, 1937No. 26007PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSutton, J.

1. It is the general rule that where one of two or more joint tort-feasors has been compelled to satisfy damages arising from a joint tortious transaction, he can not maintain an action for indemnification against those joining with him in the tort; but if the liability of the tort-feasor who has been compelled to pay the damages arises merely from negative acts or omission on his part, such as failing in his duty to inspect, and the proximate cause of the injury, with respect to the joint tort-feasors, consists in active, positive acts of negligence on the part of the other tort-feasor, in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Macon Railway & Light Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1913
  2. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Swift & Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1919

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Advanced Refrigeration Inc. v. United Motors Service Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1943
  2. Vaughn v. GuentherDistrict Court, N.D. Georgia · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API