Adepe v. City Of Thomasville

Decision Date23 October 1911
Docket Number(No. 3,375.)
Citation72 S.E. 478,9 Ga.App. 880
PartiesADEPE v. CITY OF THOMASVILLE
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

(Syllabus by the Court.)

1. Exceptions, Bill of (§ 58*)—Writ of Error — Dismissal — Acknowledgment of Service.

The motion to dismiss is controlled by Strickland v. Thornton, 2 Ga. App. 377, 58 S. E. 540.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Exceptions, Bill of, Cent. Dig. §§ 100-105; Dec. Dig. § 58.*]

2. Municipal Corporations (§ 733*)—Operation of Electric Light Plant — Negligence of Employe—Liability.

In operating an electric light plant, furnishing electric lights for pay, a city is engaged in a private, nongovernmental business, and is liable to one injured through the negligence of its employ^ engaged in repairing wires.

[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Municipal Corporations, Cent. Dig. §§ 1547-1549; Dec. Dig. § 733.*]

Error from City Court of Thomasville; W. H. Hammond, Judge.

Action by Abraham Adepe against the City of Thomasville. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed.

Theodore Titus, for plaintiff in error.

T.N. Hopkins, Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson, Roscoe Luke, and Geo. P. Whitman, for defendant in error.

RUSSELL, J. [1] 1. It appears from the bill of exceptions, and also from the transcript of the record, that a general demurrer was sustained to the petition on March 27, 1911. The certificate of the judge is dated April 3, 1911. The acknowledgment of service by counsel for the defendant in error is dated March 5, 1911. The bill of exceptions was filed in the clerk's office of the court below on April 5, 1911, and in the office of the clerk of this court on April 15, 1911. A motion is made to dismiss the bill of exceptions, because it does not appear that there has been legal service thereof on the defendant in error. It conclusively appears that the word "March, " in the acknowledgment of service, was intended for "April." In such a case the bill of exceptions Will not be dismissed. Strickland v. Thornton, 2 Ga. App. 377, 58 S. E. 540.

2. The petition alleged substantially the following facts: While standing on the sidewalk in front of his store on the principal street of the city of Thomasville, the plaintiff was hit on the head by a metal instrument weighing four or five pounds, and as a result his skull was fractured, and he sustained other enumerated injuries. It is alleged that the metal instrument was thrown by an employé of the electric light plant operated by the city, which was engaged in the business of furnishing for pay electric lights to the citizens of the city. At the time of the injury the employé was engaged in repairing the electric wires, and had the metal instrument hereinbefore referred to fastened to the end of a rope, and was attempting to throw it across the wires, located about 15 or 20 feet above the sidewalk; but the instrument missed the wires and fell with great violence on plaintiff's head. The plaintiff was standing on the sidewalk in front of his store, where he had a right to be. The street where the accident occurred is the principal business thoroughfare of the city, is occupied on...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • City Of Columbus v. Webster
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 21 Mayo 1935
    ...private would be liable." City of Greensboro v. McGibbony, 93 Ga. 672, page 675, 20 S. E. 37, 38. In Adepe v. City of Thomasville, 9 Ga. App. 880 (2), 881, 72 S. E. 478, it was held that in "furnishing electric lights for pay, a city is engaged in a private, nongovernmental business, and is......
  • Adepe v. City of Thomasville
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 23 Octubre 1911

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT