Bessman v. Greyhound Bus Depot of Atlanta, 32960
| Decision Date | 14 April 1950 |
| Docket Number | No. 1,No. 32960,32960,1 |
| Parties | BESSMAN v. GREYHOUND BUS DEPOT OF ATLANTA, Inc |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court
Under the allegations of the petition, it appears as a matter of law barring recovery that the plaintiff's injuries, which were sustained when she fell while using a wet and muddy approach to the entrance of the defendant's bus depot, were caused by her own negligence or failure on her part to exercise ordinary care in observing the wet and muddy condition of said approach, and in walking thereupon as alleged; and the trial judge properly sustained the general demurrer to the amended petition and dismissed the action.
Howard, Tiller & Howard, Elmo Holt, Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Matthews, Long & Hendrix, T. J. Long, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
The petition of Ruth C. Bessman in Fulton Superior Court shows that she sought to recover $25,000 in damages from Greyhound Bus Depot of Atlanta, Incorporated, on account of personal injuries sustained when she slipped and fell while approaching the front entrance to the defendant's bus depot in Atlanta.
The following facts are alleged in the amended petition: About 6:25 a. m. on September 4, 1948, the plaintiff was proceeding on foot up a slight incline from Cain Street in Atlanta to the front entrance of the bus depot. It was raining, and on account of travel back and forth across the approach to the entrance considerable mud and water had been allowed to accumulate. As the plaintiff approached the entrance to said depot she had her parasol raised, and, in her anxiety to get out of the rain, while lowering her parasol and changing a handbag and traveling bag from one hand to the other in order to free her right hand to use it to open the door, she did not observe the slippery condition of the defendant's premises immediately in front of the entrance to the depot; and when she reached a point about 1 1/2 feet from the door, while walking across the wet and muddy approach, as was necessary to enter the depot, she stretched forth her hand to open the door, and simultaneously she slipped and fell on said muddy approach to said front door. The inclined approach was constructed of tile or some other slick or cement material, and no rubber mat or other material was provided to keep persons entering the depot from slipping and falling.
Details of her personal injuries, medical expense, and loss of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Gibson v. Consolidated Credit Corp.
...v. Imperial Cafe, Inc., 25 Ga.App. 415, 103 S.E. 594; Avary v. Anderson, 31 Ga.App. 402, 120 S.E. 683; and Bessman v. Greyhound Bus Depot of Atlanta, 81 Ga.App. 428, 58 S.E.2d 922, in all of which this court found the charges against the defendant in the petition to be lacking when measured......
-
Starr v. Emory University
...her fall and injuries were the result of her own failure to exercise ordinary care under the circumstances. In Bessman v. Greyhound Bus Depot, 81 Ga.App. 428, 58 S.E.2d 922, the plaintiff fell while using a wet and muddy approach to the entrance of defendant's bus depot. The court held that......
-
Maloof v. Blackmon
...other than natural weather conditions of which the plaintiff was as well aware as the defendants. See Bessman v. Greyhound Bus Depot of Atlanta, 81 Ga.App. 428, 58 S.E.2d 922; McCrory Stores Corp. v. Ahern, 65 Ga.App. 334, 15 S.E.2d 797; Hill v. Davision-Paxon Co., 80 Ga.App. 840, 57 S.E.2d......
-
Atlanta Transit System, Inc. v. Allen
...negligence by remaining away, going away, or getting out of the way of a probable known danger.' In Bessman v. Greyhound Bus Depot of Atlanta, Inc., 81 Ga.App. 428, 429, 58 S.E.2d 922, 923, this court said: 'Ordinarily, questions of negligence and proximate cause are for determination by a ......