Harper v. Williams

CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals
CitationHarper v. Williams, 89 Ga.App. 645, 80 S.E.2d 722 (Ga. App. 1954)
Decision Date13 February 1954
Docket NumberNo. 34877,No. 1,34877,1
PartiesHARPER v. WILLIAMS
Writing for the CourtQUILLIAN; FELTON, C. J., and NICHOLS

Syllabus by the Court.

The trial court did not err in denying the amended motion for a new trial.

J. W. Williams, a minor, by and through his father as next friend, sued for damages Forest C. Harper, trading as Harper Hardware and Supply Company. The petition as amended in substance alleged: that on the night of December 24, 1951, the plaintiff and another were riding on the right front seat as guests in an automobile owned by one Earl Cribbs and operated by him in a southeasterly direction along Cherry Street in the city of Jesup, Georgia; that the plaintiff was seated on the extreme right side of the front seat with his right elbow resting on the door; that said automobile was traveling approximately 10 miles per hour at a point between Macom and West Broad Streets; that the defendant is the owner of a certain two-ton International truck approximately 27 feet long, which at the time and place aforesaid had been parked by agents or employees of the defendant, unknown to the plaintiff, at the southwest curb of the said Cherry Street in such a manner that the rear end of said truck protruded into the path of automobile traffic traveling along Cherry Street in a southeasterly direction; that the rear end of said truck crashed against the right elbow of the plaintiff, shattering the bones thereof and mangling the entire right arm of the plaintiff so that the same is utterly and permanently useless.

It was alleged that the defendant was negligent in parking the truck in violation of a City Ordinance of Jesup, as follows: 'From and after Septemeber 17, 1935, it will be unlawful to park 'long trucks' on the following streets: Cherry Street from Macon to alley between East Broad and Brunswick Streets; on West Broad from Walnut to alley between Cherry and Plum Streets; on East Broad from alley on either side of Cherry Street'; and that the defendant was negligent also in the following particulars: 'By parking said truck on said Cherry Street in such a manner as to leave the rear end of said truck protruding into the line of traffic without attaching warning lights or signals of any kind to said truck; By parking said truck so that the rear end protruded into the line of traffic without leaving an attendant to warn petitioner of the impending danger'; and 'by failing to remove said truck from the line of traffic after he discovered, or by the exercise of ordinary care and diligence should have discovered, that the rear end thereof was parked in the path of vehicular traffic'; and in violating an ordinance of the City of Jesup passed August 17, 1948, which provides that 'It shall be unlawful to park a truck or other vehicle having an overall length of over 18 feet on Cherry Street; on West Broad Street, East Broad Street or Macon Street, between Walnut and Plum Street.' All of said acts of negligence were alleged to have been the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries.

The defendant answered, admitting the formal allegations of the petition and that he owned the truck described, but denying the other allegations and denying that the injury occurred in the manner alleged by the plaintiff, or that the defendant's negligence contributed to the plaintiff's injury; and further pleading that the damages sustained by the plaintiff were the result of the negligence of the plaintiff and the driver of the automobile in which he was riding. The answer further affirmatively alleged that the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
  • Browning v. Kahle, 39401
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • May 15, 1962
    ...bound to exercise the same degree of care and diligence as a driver of an automobile in which the guest is riding. See Harper v. Williams, 89 Ga.App. 645, 80 S.E.2d 722. In every case we have found holding that a guest passenger had a duty to take some affirmative action such as to warn his......
  • Peacock v. Sheffield, 42445
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • January 31, 1967
    ...a manner as to preclude any recovery. McCowall Transport Inc. v. Gault, 80 Ga.App. 445, 56 S.E.2d 161. See also Harper v. Williams, 89 Ga.App. 645, 647, 80 S.E.2d 722; Reynolds v. Rentz, 98 Ga.App. 4, 104 S.E.2d 608, supra. Here as in the Johns case, 106 Ga.App. 96, 126 S.E.2d 296, supra, t......