F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Wood
| Decision Date | 11 August 1924 |
| Docket Number | 15615. |
| Citation | 124 S.E. 110,32 Ga.App. 575 |
| Parties | F. W. WOOLWORTH CO. v. WOOD. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Syllabus by the Court.
As against a general demurrer, the petition sufficiently charged that the defendant was negligent in causing or allowing a slippery substance to be placed upon the floor in its store into which the plaintiff was invited as a customer, and that by reason of the resultant condition of the floor she was injured in slipping and falling thereon.
In an action for damages for the alleged negligence of the defendant in a case like the present, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to negative any negligence or want of ordinary care on her part. This is a matter of defense, and in such a case the petition in this respect will be good, unless from the averments made it affirmatively appears that the injuries were the result of the plaintiff's own negligence or failure to exercise ordinary care.
Negligence on the part of the defendant and resulting injury being alleged, and no failure to exercise ordinary care and no negligence amounting thereto on the part of the plaintiff appearing, the petition set forth a cause of action. The general demurrer thereto was properly overruled.
Error from City Court of Atlanta; H. M. Reid, Judge.
Action by Mrs. E. A. Wood against the F. W. Woolworth Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.
Whorton O. Wilson, of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Thos E. Scott, of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
BELL J. (after stating the facts as above).
1. The petition in this case as against a general demurrer sufficiently charged that the defendant was negligent in causing or allowing a slippery substance to be placed upon the floor of its store, into which the plaintiff was invited as a customer, and that by reason of the resultant condition of the floor she was injured in slipping and falling thereon. Mattox v. Lambright, 31 Ga.App. 441, 120 S.E. 685. In the case cited most of the decisions relied on by the plaintiff in error are analyzed, and they are distinguishable upon their facts from the case now before us.
2, 3. In an action for damages for alleged negligence of the defendant in a case of this character, it is not necessary for the plaintiff to negative any negligence or want of ordinary care on her part. This is a matter of defense, and in such a case the petition in this respect will be...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cent. Of Ga. Ry. Co v. Br1dwell, (Nos. 15879, 15903.)
...that the injury or death was the result of the plaintiff's own negligence or failure to exercise ordinary care. Woolworth Co. v. Wood, 32 Ga. App. 575 (2) 124 S. E. 110, and citations. It was held in the Lowe Case, supra, that where a person is sitting or lying in an exposed position on or ......
-
Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Bridwell
... ... failure to exercise ordinary care. Woolworth Co. v ... Wood, 32 Ga.App. 575 (2) 124 S.E. 110, and citations. It ... was held in the Lowe ... ...
-
S. H. Kress & Co. v. Dyer
...31 Ga. App. 441, 120 S. E. 685; Scott v. Kline's, Inc. (Mo. App.) 284 S. W. 831, and authorities there cited; F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Wood, 32 Ga. App. 575, 124 S. E. 110; Langley v. F. W. Woolworth Co., 47 R. I. 165, 131 A. 194; Markman v. Fred P. Bell Stores Co., 285 Pa. 378, 132 A. 178, 4......
-
Blanton v. Doughty, 39531
...shown by the allegations of the petition (Watts v. Colonial Stages Co., 45 Ga.App. 115, 119, 163 S.E. 523; Woolworth Company v. Wood, 32 Ga.App. 575, 124 S.E. 110; Fuller v. Louis Steyerman & Sons, Inc., 46 Ga.App. 830, 169 S.E. 508); and while there is no necessity that the plaintiff negat......