Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Royal Crown Bottling Co. v. Bell

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Decided September 25, 1959No. 37747Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Felton, Chief Judge,

concurring in part and dissenting in part.' I concur in the judgments overruling the general and special demurrers to the petition. I dissent from the judgments of the majority for the reason that I do not think the court should have submitted to the jury the question whether the deaths of Mr. and Mrs. Pennington were simultaneous.

The common-law rule regarding death in a common catastrophe is as follows: “Where two or more persons perish in the same disaster and there is no fact or circumstance to prove which survived, the law will no more presume that all died at the same…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Travelers Insurance v. SheppardSupreme Court of Georgia · 1890
  2. Carr v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1895
  3. Sappington v. BellSupreme Court of Georgia · 1902
  4. Teague v. KeithSupreme Court of Georgia · 1959
  5. Hunter v. StateSupreme Court of Georgia · 1911

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API