Locke v. Ford

• Decision Date: 28 September 1936
• Docket Number: 25781.
• Citation: 187 S.E. 715,54 Ga.App. 322
• Parties: LOCKE et al. v. FORD.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

187 S.E. 715

54 Ga.App. 322

LOCKE et al. v. FORD.

No. 25781.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division

September 28, 1936

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Operators of taxicab business of transporting general public for hire are carriers and must exercise extraordinary diligence for protection of passengers (Code 1933, §§ 18-201, 18-204).

Four and one-half year old child is conclusively presumed to be incapable of contributory negligence.

Carrier on city streets ordinarily discharges its legal duty to passenger by depositing him at usual and reasonably safe place for alighting and crossing street, and is not obligated to wait until approaching automobiles have stopped, or to warn passenger of usual dangers of traffic (Code 1933, §§ 18-201, 18-204).

Carrier on city streets may not deposit passenger where it knows passenger will be exposed to unusual and unnecessary peril and may be held liable for proximately resulting injury (Code 1933, §§ 18-201, 18-204).

Voluntary intentional concert in acts of tort-feasors is unnecessary to create joint liability where separate acts combine naturally and directly to constitute proximate cause of a single injury.

Petition against taxicab operators, for injuries to child which had been run over by truck after taxicab driver had deposited child between crossing streets in center of heavily traveled city street opposite her destination, stated a cause of action (Code 1933, §§ 18-201, 18-204).

Error from Superior Court, Muscogee County; C. F. McLaughlin Judge.

Action by Mrs. W. J. Ford, next friend, etc., against J. O. Locke and others. To review a judgment for plaintiff, defendants bring error.

Affirmed.

Slade, Swift, Pease & Davidson, of Columbus, for plaintiffs in error.

W. R. Flournoy and Palmer & Wohlwender, all of Columbus, for defendant in error.

Syllabus OPINION.

JENKINS Presiding Judge.

1. The operators of a taxicab business of transporting the general public for hire are carriers of passengers, and amenable to the legal duty of exercising extraordinary diligence for their protection. Code 1933, §§ 18-201, 18-204; Durfey v. Milligan, 265 Mich. 97, 251 N.W. 356; 10 C.J. 606, 607, §§ 1033, 1034, and cit.

2. A child four and a half years old is conclusively presumed to be incapable of contributory negligence. Crawford v. So. Ry. Co., 106 Ga. 870 (2), 33 S.E. 826.

3. Ordinarily a carrier of passengers by street car or other conveyance on city streets discharges its legal duty to a passenger when it deposits him at a usual and reasonably safe place for alighting and crossing the street, and is under no obligation to wait until approaching automobiles have stopped, or to warn him of the usual dangers of traffic, which in his exercise of ordinary care would be avoidable. But a carrier is not permitted to deposit a passenger at a place which it knows will reasonably expose him to unusual and unnecessary peril, and it may be held liable for a proximately resulting injury. Macon Railway & Light Co. v. Vining, 120 Ga. 511, 513 (1), 48 S.E. 232; Augusta Ry. Co. v. Glover, 92 Ga. 132 (10), 146, 18 S.E. 406; Jernigan v. Georgia Ry. & Power Co., 31 Ga.App. 273 (2, 3), 120 S.E. 439; Georgia Railway & Power Co. v. Gilbert, 39 Ga.App. 56, 146 S.E. 33; Metts v. L. & N. R. Co., 52 Ga.App. 115, 117, 182 S.E. 531; Martin v. Georgia Power Co., 45 Ga.App. 799, 165 S.E. 880; 10 C.J. 914, § 1340.

4. Voluntary, intentional concert in the acts of tort-feasors is not necessary to create joint liability, if the separate acts combine...