General Motors Corp. v. Wilson, 44391
| Decision Date | 02 July 1969 |
| Docket Number | No. 44391,No. 1,44391,1 |
| Parties | GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION v. Marion D. WILSON et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
King & Spalding, Charles H. Kirbo, R. Byron Attridge, Charles M. Shaffer, Jr., Atlanta, for appellant.
Woodruff, Savell, Lane & Williams, Edward L. Savell, Paul R. Koehler, Atlanta, for appellee.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Marion D. Wilson brought a complaint against Imogene Ross, International Ladies Garment Workers Union and General Motors Corporation in two counts. Count 1 was against all three defendants and seeking recovery against General Motors Corporation under an alleged warranty as to the merchantability of the vehicle and alleged that the vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger driven by Imogene Ross was being driven down an incline and that the brakes ceased to function properly, the master cylinder failed to maintain its pressure and the hoses connecting the cylinder with each wheel began to leak and failed to transmit the hydraulic pressure to the brake cylinders when the brake pedal was pushed down, that the wheel cylinders ceased to operate properly and failed to cause the brake shoes to be forced out to the wheel drums and the brakes did as a whole fail to operate. Count 2 of the petition alleged negligence on the part of the defendant Ross and International Ladies Garment Workers Union and sought recovery on this basis against them alone. General Motors Corporation made a motion for summary judgment based upon 'the pleadings and all documents attached thereto on file' and upon an affidavit of H. Fred Hansen, attached to the motion, the material parts of which read as follows: 'I am familiar with the construction and functioning of the individual parts and of the entire vehicle of most of the automotive vehicles now in use.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dickerson v. Hulsey
...never 'pierce the pleadings'-and can never be sufficient evidence upon which to base a summary judgment. General Motors Corporation v. Wilson, 120 Ga.App. 156, 157, 169 S.E.2d 749; Ginn v. Morgan, 225 Ga. 192(1, 3), 167 S.E.2d 393; Harrison v. Tuggle, 225 Ga. 211(2), 167 S.E.2d 395. 3. This......
-
LaCount v. United Ins. Co. of America, 52035
...cases as Harrison v. Tuggle, 225 Ga. 211(2), 167 S.E.2d 395; Ginn v. Morgan, 225 Ga. 192, 167 S.E.2d 393; General Motors Corporation v. Wilson, 120 Ga.App. 156, 157, 169 S.E.2d 749. 6. Thomas H. Kinnaman, a vice president and underwriter of the defendant insurer, submitted his affidavit in ......
-
Waldrop v. Padgett
... ... Funderburk, 119 Ga.App. 734, 168 S.E.2d 657; General Motors Corporation ... v. Willson, 120 Ga.App. 156, 169 ... ...
-
Hardman v. Dahlonega-Lumpkin County Chamber of Commerce, DAHLONEGA-LUMPKIN
...(cits. omitted); albeit, a summary judgment may be successfully contested by use of opinion evidence. See General Motors Corp. v. Wilson, 120 Ga.App. 156, 169 S.E.2d 749 ( (1969) )." Equity National Life Ins. Co. v. Shelnutt, 128 Ga.App. 849, 851, 198 S.E.2d 350, 352 2. In their second enum......