Blakewood v. Yellow Cab Co.
| Decision Date | 28 November 1939 |
| Docket Number | 27553. |
| Citation | 6 S.E.2d 126,61 Ga.App. 149 |
| Parties | BLAKEWOOD v. YELLOW CAB CO. et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Ulmer & Dowell, of Savannah, for plaintiff in error.
Connerat & Hunter, of Savannah, for defendants in error.
Carrie Blakewood, wife of James Blakewood, filed suit in the City Court of Savannah against the Yellow Cab Company of Savannah for personal injuries received while a passenger in a taxi cab operated by the defendant company. In this suit Carrie Blakewood alleged "That your petitioner is a married woman, but is dependent upon herself for support, responsible for her own bills, including the medical expenses of treatment resulting from the accident herein set out and is entitled to her own earnings," she further claimed in her said suit that she was entitled to recover for her loss of earnings, medical expense and for the cost of an operation alleged to be necessary to restore her to good health. Upon the trial of her case Carrie testified she was married but offered no evidence to show her right to sue for and recover for her loss of earnings and/or medical expenses, etc. The court instructed the jury in accordance with the motion of the defendant that the plaintiff being a married woman and not having shown her right to recover the items of doctors' bills, loss of earnings and costs of operation, these items were not to be considered by the jury. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.
Thereafter James Blakewood, the present plaintiff in error, brought his suit against the Yellow Cab Company of Savannah and its insurance carrier, Globe Indemnity Company, seeking to recover for the earnings alleged to have been lost by his wife, for the medical expenses incurred for her and for the cost of an operation alleged to have been rendered necessary by the injuries his wife had received while a passenger in a taxicab operated by the Yellow Cab Company of Savannah. To this action the defendants in error filed their answers general and special demurrers and a plea of res judicata contending (1st) that Carrie Blakewood having alleged in her petition that she was an emancipated woman the verdict of the jury determined that there could be no recovery for her loss of earnings, medical expenses, etc., and (2nd) that the verdict of the jury in favor of the defendant in Carrie Blakewood's suit adjudicated the question of liability in that suit and in the suit of her husband, James Blakewood. The judge sustained the plea of res judicata and dismissed plaintiff in error's petition. Plaintiff in error excepts.
Code § 110-501, provides: "A judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction shall be conclusive between the same parties and their privies as to all matters put in issue, or which under the rules of law might have been put in issue in the cause wherein the judgment was rendered, until such judgment shall be reversed or set aside." The parties are unquestionably not...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Aycock v. Calk
...are not privies for purpose of res judicata. Russ Transp. v. Jones, 104 Ga.App. 612, 613-614, 122 S.E.2d 282 (1961); Blakewood v. Yellow Cab Co. of Savannah, 61 Ga.App. 149, hn. 4, 150-151, 6 S.E.2d 126 (1939). Joint tortfeasors are not privies unless such privity is reciprocal, so that an ......
-
Smith v. Wood, 42603
...mere fact that in the event of his death they will be his heirs at law does not afford the privity required. Cf. Blakewood v. Yellow Cab Co., 61 Ga.App. 149, 6 S.E.2d 126; Russ Transport, Inc. v. Jones, 104 Ga.App. 612, 122 S.E.2d 282, dealing with pleas of res This is not to say that any d......
-
Clark v. Lansburgh & Bro., 5672.
...Ramer v. Hughes, 131 S.C. 488, 490, 127 S.E. 565; Crichton v. United States, 67 App. D.C. 300, 92 F.2d 224. Cf.: Blakewood v. Yellow Cab Co. et al., 61 Ga.App. 149, 6 S.E.2d 126; Kraut v. Cleveland R. Co., 132 Ohio St. 125, 5 N.E.2d 324, 108 A.L.R. 521; Laskowski v. People's Ice Co., 203 Mi......
-
Jones v. Beasley
...Inc. v. Jones, 104 Ga.App. 612, 122 S.E.2d 282 (1961); Owens v. Williams, 87 Ga.App. 238, 73 S.E.2d 512 (1952); Blakewood v. Yellow Cab Co., 61 Ga.App. 149, 6 S.E.2d 126 (1939). But does state law govern the scope and effect of any federal court judgment? The answer is no. Aerojet-General C......