Legal Opinion

Nashville, Chattanooga & Saint Louis Railway v. Mooneyham

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 29, 1927No. 17614PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStephens, J.

1. The diligence which a railroad company owes to a passenger as respects Eis convenience and comfort at a station while waiting for a train is ordinary diligence. Central R. &c. Co. v. Perry, 58 Ga. 461. In a suit against a railroad company to recover damages for an alleged unlawful eviction of the plaintiff from a waiting-room of the defendant at night at a station where, the plaintiff was waiting as a through passenger to take a connecting train, where there was evidence to the effect that the defendant refused to keep open the waiting-room for the plaintiff’s convenience and comfort, a…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Head v. Georgia Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1887
  2. Georgia Railroad v. HomerSupreme Court of Georgia · 1885
  3. Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. PerrySupreme Court of Georgia · 1877
  4. Mabry v. City Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  5. Mooneyham v. Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1925

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Korn v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1963
  2. Southeastern Greyhound Lines v. SuitsCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API