Hawes v. Central of Georgia R. Co., 43561

Decision Date17 April 1968
Docket NumberNo. 43561,No. 2,43561,2
PartiesT. L. HAWES v. CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RAILWAY COMPANY
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Thomas M. Odom, Millen, Percy J. Blount, Waynesboro, for appellant.

Spivey & Carlton, Milton A. Carlton, Swainsboro, for appellee.

Syllabus Opinion by the Court

BELL, Presiding Judge.

Hawes brought this suit against Central of Georgia Railway Company to recover for the destruction of plaintiff's building. Both counts of the complaint showed that plaintiff owned a building located on land adjacent to railroad tracks. Plaintiff occupied the land as defendant's tenant under a lease providing, 'The tenant further agrees: * * * To indemnify and hold the landlord harmless against all loss, damage, liability or expense arising from injury or damage to the leased premises or from injury or damages occurring to any person or property thereon, whether or not said injury or damage is attributable, in whole or in part, to the negligence of the landlord or his agents or servants, or to the operation of his trains, engines or cars.' On December 13, 1966, a train operated by defendant left the tracks and struck and destroyed the building. Count I of the complaint was based on willful and wanton negligence. Count II was based on trespass. Plaintiff took this appeal from the trial court's judgment sustaining defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. Held:

Except in cases prohibited by statute and cases where a public duty is owed, the general rule is that a party may exempt himself by contract from liability to the other party for injuries caused by negligence; and the agreement is not void for contravening public policy. Code § 102-106; Hearn v. Central of Ga. Ry. Co., 22 Ga.App. 1, 3-7, 95 S.E. 368; King v. Smith, 47 Ga.App. 360, 364, 170 S.E. 546. The latter case is authority for the further proposition that an exculpatory provision like the one in this case does not relieve one from liability for wilful or wanton conduct. Brady v. Glosson, 87 Ga.App. 476, 478, 74 S.E.2d 253. On trial of this case plaintiff will be entitled to recover only if the evidence shows that defendant's conduct was 'such as to evidence a wilful intention to inflict the injury or else was so reckless or so charged with indifference to the consequences * * * as to justify the jury in finding a wantonness equivalent in spirit to actual intent.' King v. Smith, 47...

To continue reading

Request your trial
23 cases
  • DL Lee & Sons v. ADT Sec. Systems, Mid-South
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Georgia
    • 27 d4 Abril d4 1995
    ...(Allegations of Defendant's wilful and wanton conduct precluded granting of motion for summary judgment.); Hawes v. Central of Ga. R. Co., 117 Ga.App. 771, 162 S.E.2d 14 (1968); Corral, 240 Kan. 678, 732 P.2d 1260, 1265 (1987) (Limitation of liability clause upheld due to lack of evidence o......
  • Ruble v. King
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • 18 d1 Setembro d1 1995
    ...the official from being protected by immunity. Truelove, 159 Ga.App. at 908, 285 S.E.2d 556 (citing Hawes v. Central of Ga. Ry. Co., 117 Ga.App. 771, 772, 162 S.E.2d 14 (1968)). In this case, the Court concludes that defendants King, Ashford, Burke, Jones and C. Mills are not immune from su......
  • Brown v. Five Points Parking Center
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 27 d3 Maio d3 1970
    ...711(1), 68 S.E. 56; King v. Smith, 47 Ga.App. 360, 170 S.E. 546; Brady v. Glosson, 87 Ga.App. 476, 74 S.E.2d 253; Hawes v. Central of Ga. R. Co., 117 Ga.App. 771, 162 S.E.2d 14. Cf. Golden v. National Life & Accident Ins. Co., 189 Ga. 79, 5 S.E.2d The evidence did not authorize a finding of......
  • Wade v. Watson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • 14 d1 Dezembro d1 1981
    ...one from liability for wilful or wanton conduct. Brady v. Glosson, 87 Ga.App. 476, 478, 74 S.E.2d 253." Hawes v. Central of Georgia R. Co., 117 Ga. App. 771, 772, 162 S.E.2d 14 (1968). Also, "Provisions in rent and carriage contracts relieving the landlord or the carrier from liability for ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT