Marketing Sales Industries of Georgia, Inc. v. Roberts
| Decision Date | 17 September 1968 |
| Docket Number | 43778. |
| Citation | 118 Ga. App. 718,165 S.E.2d 319 |
| Parties | MARKETING SALES INDUSTRIES OF GEORGIA, INC. v. ROBERTS, by Next Friend, et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Nall, Miller, Cadenhead & Dennis, Thomas S. Carlock, for appellant.
Neely, Freeman & Hawkins, J. Bruce Welch, Joe C. Freeman, Jr., Thomas H. Harper, Jr., R. Keegan Federal, Jr., for appellees.
This is a suit based on negligence to recover damages against a corporate defendant and its employee Thompson. The plaintiff, a minor, sustained injuries when he was struck by an automobile driven by Thompson. The employer took this appeal from the denial of its motion for summary judgment based on the deposition of the president of the employer corporation and the deposition of defendant Thompson. The testimony showed that Thompson was employed to sell built-in vacuum cleaning systems to homeowners. He worked as an outside salesman, furnishing his own transportation, and made presentations to homeowners in the evenings rather than during the usual hours of business. He was required to come by the employer's office late in the afternoon, where he would be given a lead, or appointment, which customarily would be set for 6 or 6:30 p. m. In order to assure dependability in the keeping of appointments, the employer as a matter of policy would never furnish its salesmen a lead until the salesmen appeared at the office late in the afternoon and ready to depart to keep the appointment. In the morning of the day the plaintiff's injuries occurred, Thompson went to the employer's office to deliver papers in connection with a sale which he had made the previous evening. Driving his own automobile, he left there about 2 p. m., having no duties in connection with his employment for the remainder of the afternoon until such time as he might return to the office to pick up a lead for the evening. He then went to the Blue Lantern Bar, where his brother was manager. There he had two drinks and engaged in personal conversation with his brother. When the collision occurred, about 4 or 4:15 p. m., Thompson was driving home in order to eat supper and change into business clothes before returning to work for the evening. Held:
To hold a master liable for a tort committed by his servant, the test is not that the act of the servant was done during the general term of the employment, but whether the servant was at that time serving...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. Sheffield
...116 Ga.App. 324, 157 S.E.2d 514; Georgia Power Co. v. Kendricks, 117 Ga.App. 129, 159 S.E.2d 303; Marketing Sales Industries of Georgia, Inc. v. Roberts, 118 Ga.App. 718, 165 S.E.2d 319. And see Jones v. Dixie Ohio Express, Inc., 116 Ga.App. 155, 156, 156 S.E.2d 388. 2. (a) In Count 2 the t......
-
Watkins v. United States, Civ. A. No. 176-91.
...v. Star Service & Petroleum Corp., supra (summary judgment that employee was outside scope); Marketing Sales Industries of Georgia, Inc. v. Roberts, 118 Ga.App. 718, 165 S.E.2d 319 (1968) II. Williams' Motion to Dismiss (Federal Drivers Act). Because Williams was "within the scope," he can ......
-
Davis Gas Co. v. Powell, 52582
...Corp. v. Scott, 132 Ga.App. 245, 207 S.E.2d 705; Harden v. Clarke, 123 Ga.App. 142, 179 S.E.2d 667; Marketing Sales Industries of Ga., Inc. v. Roberts, 118 Ga.App. 718, 165 S.E.2d 319. This test, which looks to the relation or nonrelation of the tortious act to that which the servant was em......
-
Bennett v. Associated Food Stores, Inc.
... ... Court of Appeals of Georgia ... Argued April 1, 1968 ... Decided November 25, ... vehicles or the cost of the license plates, or the sales taxes, or of what these might have been expected to be for ... ...