Lee v. Ga. Forest Prod.S Co
| Decision Date | 20 February 1932 |
| Docket Number | No. 21256.,21256. |
| Parties | LEE. v. GEORGIA FOREST PRODUCTS CO. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Judgment Adhered to After Rehearing
March 5, 1932.
Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
Error from Superior Court, Camden County; J. H. Thomas, Judge.
Suit by Robert Lee, by his next friend, against Georgia Forest Products Company. To review the judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error.
Reversed.
Emmett McElreath, of Kingsland, and S. C. Townsend, of Folkston, for plaintiff in error.
R. D. Meader and Reese, Scarlett, Bennet & Highsmith, all of Brunswick, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
Where the owner of premises left dynamite caps, which were dangerous explosives, in a box exposed and unguarded, beside a traveled private roadway on the premises, and easily accessible to children, who are attracted thereto, the dynamite caps at the time not being put to immediate use by the owner, and where a child eight years of age, who had come onto the premises with the owner's permission and while using the roadway, picked up some of the dynamite caps the dangerous character of which was not known to him and carried them to his home, where his brother, a child four years of age, himself unaware of the dangerous character of the caps, was attracted to them by their bright color and undertook to play with them by rattling them in a tin bucket, and the caps exploded and injured him, the owner of the premises, in permitting the dynamite caps to be thus left, unguarded and exposed upon the premises by the roadside, under the circumstances, may have been guilty of negligence proximately causing the injuries to the child, and it may be inferable that the owner, in thus permitting the caps to be upon the premises, under the circumstances, was guilty of gross negligence and a wanton act. In a suit by the injured child against the owner of the premises to recover damages for the injuries thus sustained, the petition as amended set out a cause of action and was improperly dismissed on demurrer. Mills v. Central of Georgia Railway Co., 140 Ga. 181, 78 S. E. 816, Ann. Cas. 1914C, 1098; Wallace v. Matthewson, 143 Ga. 236, 84 S. E. 450; Terrell v. Giddings & Son, 28 Ga. App. 697, 112 S. E. 914.
Judgment reversed.
On Rehearing.
It is insisted in a motion for rehearing that the language contained in the syllabus, "the dynamite caps at the time not being put to immediate use by the owner, " is not authorized by the averments of the petition. That, construing the petition most strongly against the pleader, the dynamite caps were on the roadway for the purpose of being used in the repair work or construction work being done, and there is nothing in the petition from which an inference could be authorized that the defendant negligently left the dynamite caps in an exposed position for any considerable length of time. It is insisted that the petition does not show the time of day when the accident happened, and therefore does not exclude the idea that the construction work had been temporarily discontinued for the lunch hour, or some other...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Laite v. Baxter
...are entitled to care proportioned to their inability to foresee and avoid the perils that they may encounter (Lee v. Georgia Forest Products Co., 44 Ga.App. 850, 163 S.E. 267), as well as to the superior knowledge of persons who come into contact with them.' 57 Am.Jur.2d Negligence, § 89, p......
-
Harris v. Hardman
...generally are entitled to care proportioned to their ability to foresee and avoid perils that they may encounter. Lee v. Ga. Forest Products Co., 44 Ga.App. 850, 163 S.E. 267. 6. The evidence shows the child was two years old, placed in custody of the grandparents for the night, although th......
- Lee v. Georgia Forest Products Co.