Hangar Cab Co. v. City of Atlanta, 45672
| Decision Date | 15 October 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 45672,No. 2,45672,2 |
| Parties | HANGAR CAB COMPANY, Inc. v. CITY OF ATLANTA et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Joseph J. Anthony, Atlanta, for appellant.
Henry L. Bowden, Martin McFarland, Atlanta, Harvey, Rhodes & Willard, E. C. Harvey, Jr., Decatur, for appellees.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
Hangar Cab Company sued the City of Atlanta and E. Jack Smith, d/b/a E. Jack Smith Construction Company, for contribution under Code Ann. § 105-2012, alleging that it had paid to a fare-paying passenger in its cab the sum of $3,180 in settlement of a claim for personal injuries arising when the cab had run into a pile of unlighted dirt and a manhole cover in a street which the city had raised preparatory for surfacing by Smith, the contractor, and that the settlement was made 'to avoid a more costly settlement which would occur in the event (the passenger) resorted to litigation in this court.' It does not appear that the city was given notice of any claim against the city by Hangar Cab Company or by anyone acting in its behalf, though notice of the passenger's claim was given. Motions to strike certain allegations of the complaint were sustained, as well as a motion to dismiss because it failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Hangar Cab Company appeals. Held:
Pretermitting the matters of whether the cab company's passenger may have had a claim for damages against either the city or the contractor, and of whether the ante litem notice given to the city by the passenger could inure to the Cab Company's benefit (see in this connection Jones v. City Council of Augusta, 100 Ga.App. 268, 110 S.E.2d 691; Campbell v. City of Atlanta, 117 Ga.App. 824, 162 S.E.2d 213), we find no error in the sustaining of the motion to dismiss. Independently of Ga.L.1966, p. 433 (Code Ann. § 105-2012), no right of contribution exists in favor of one tort-feasor against another, when the first had made settlement with one having a claim for damages against both. Advanced Refrigeration v. United Motors Service, 69 Ga.App. 783, 26 S.E.2d 789. Before a claim for contribution can arise under Code Ann. § 105-2012 it must appear that a judgment has been entered in favor of the party with whom settlement has been nade and against the tortfeasor who claims contribution because of the payment made. Thornhill v. Bullock, 118 Ga.App. 186(2), 162 S.E.2d 886 (cert. denied). Consequently it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. Brunswick Pulp & Paper Co.
...Shipping Co., 114 Ga.App. 581, 151 S.E.2d 916; Thornhill v. Bullock, 118 Ga.App. 186, 162 S.E.2d 886; Hangar Cab Company, Inc. v. City of Atlanta et al., 122 Ga.App. 661, 178 S.E.2d 292; Hospital Authority of Emanuel County v. Gray, 123 Ga.App. 415, 181 S.E.2d 299; Atlanta Milling Company v......
-
United States Lines, Inc. v. United States
...a judgment being obtained against the person seeking contribution from one who may be jointly liable. Hangar Cab Company, Inc. v. City of Atlanta et al., 122 Ga.App. 661, 178 S.E.2d 292; Hospital Authority of Emanuel County v. Gray, 123 Ga.App. 415, 181 S.E.2d 299. See also Thornhill v. Bul......
-
Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Curtiss
...7, 1972, rather than, as the trial court apparently held, on July 1, 1972. Previously, the rule of Hangar Cab Co., Inc. v. City of Atlanta, 122 Ga.App. 661, 178 S.E.2d 292, 293 (1970), disapproved on other grounds, McMichael v. Georgia Power Co., 133 Ga.App. 593, 211 S.E.2d 632 (1974), '. .......
-
Southern Ry. Co. v. A. O. Smith Corp.
...entered against the party seeking contribution. Thornhill v. Bullock, 118 Ga.App. 186, 188(2), 162 S.E.2d 886; Hangar Cab Co. v. City of Atlanta, 122 Ga.App. 661, 178 S.E.2d 292. Thus, where a tortfeasor compromised the injured party's claim, he had no right of contribution against an alleg......