Paschal v. Hardwick
| Decision Date | 17 October 1942 |
| Docket Number | 29706. |
| Citation | Paschal v. Hardwick, 68 Ga.App. 571, 23 S.E.2d 465 (Ga. App. 1942) |
| Parties | PASCHAL v. HARDWICK. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1942.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court.
Randall Evans, Jr., and Jack D. Evans, both of Thomson, for plaintiff in error.
Stevens & Stevens, of Thomson, for defendant in error.
1.While in an action for damages based upon the alleged unlawful homicide of the plaintiff's husband, the plaintiff can not in one count allege both wanton and slight negligence on the part of the defendant(Southern Ry. Co. v. McCrary, 55 Ga.App. 406, 190 S.E. 195), yet it is well settled by numerous decisions of the Supreme Court and this court that she can do so in different counts of her petition.
2.Applying the above-stated ruling to the facts of this case, the court erred in disallowing the amendment to the petition offered by the plaintiff; and that error rendered the further proceedings in the case nugatory.
Judgment reversed.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day 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
Start Your 3-day 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
Start Your 3-day 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
Start Your 3-day 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
Start Your 3-day 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
Start Your 7-day Trial
4 cases
-
Willis v. Hill, 42881
...Atlanta B. & C.R. Co., 47 Ga.App. 85, 88, 169 S.E. 756; Southern Ry. Co. v. McCrary, 55 Ga.App. 406(2), 190 S.E. 195; Paschal v. Hardwick, 68 Ga.App. 571(1), 23 S.E.2d 465, holding that a petition alleging in one count violations of the duty to exercise ordinary care and of the duty to refr......
-
Cook v. Kinzua Pine Mills Co.
...plaintiff was not a guest; count two charging recklessness and that plaintiff was a guest. She discussion 277 N.W. 311. Paschal v. Hardwick, 68 Ga.App. 571, 23 S.E.2d 465, holding that slight negligence and wanton conduct may be pleaded in different counts of complaint. She also, Michels v.......
- National Lloyd's v. Stevens
- Paschal v. Hardwick, 29706.