Southern Railway Co. v. Ray
Court of Appeals of Georgia
Action for damages; from city court of Carrollton — Judge Iiood. August 5, 1921. Application for certiorari was made to the Supreme Court.
1Opinion of the CourtJenkins, P. J.
1. The admission of alleged irrelevant and immaterial testimony, to the effect that an engineer of long experience could start or stop a train better and more carefully than an engineer of shorter experience, could not have prejudiced the defendant, even if such evidence be taken as improperly admitted, since the answer of the witness, “ It looks to reason that they should, but it is not in every case that they do,” was of such non-committal character as could not have affected the result of the case.
■2. “ It is the duty of the trial judge, without any written request, to state to the jury…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Slaughter v. HeathSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Powell v. Augusta & Summerville RailroadSupreme Court of Georgia · 1887
- Atlanta Street Railroad v. JacobsSupreme Court of Georgia · 1891
- Rome Railroad v. BarnettSupreme Court of Georgia · 1894
- Southern Railway Co. v. MerrittSupreme Court of Georgia · 1904
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hunt v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1961
- American Surety Co. v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937
- Brisendine v. HuntCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
- City of Griffin v. Southeastern Textile Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1949
- Southern Railway Co. v. RayCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1923