Peavy v. Chavers
| Decision Date | 10 March 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 44702,No. 3,44702,3 |
| Citation | 173 S.E.2d 749,121 Ga.App. 354 |
| Parties | Bobby L. PEAVY et al. v. Fred CHAVERS, Administrator et al |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
H. Thad Crawley, butler, for appellants.
Harold Sheats, Martin H. Peabody, Ronald L. Reid, Atlanta, George D. Busbee, Albany, for appellees.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
The plaintiffs, appellants, brought an action for damages for the wrongful death of Mary Ann Peavy and named T. Ralph Grimes and the estate of Robert Willard Watson as defendants. The complaint alleges that Mary Ann Peavy was killed when the car in which she was riding as a passenger was struck by a car driven by Watson; that Waston at the time was a deputy sheriff acting under T. Ralph Grimes, the then Sheriff of Fulton County, Georgia; and that Watson was conveying a prisoner. The complaint alleges that Watson's car was equipped with unsafe, defective tires in that they were worn and slick and that such condition was known or should have been known by both Watson and Grimes; that it was nighttime and raining; that Watson drove the car around a curve at a greater speed than was reasonable and prudent under such conditions and failed to have the car under his control and that it veered, crossed over the centerline, and crashed into the car in which Mary Ann Peavy was riding. It is alleged that Watson was negligent in driving his car with defective tires around a curve at a speed which was excessive under the circumstances; and that both defendants were negligent in allowing and permitting the defective tires to remain on the car.
The case is before us on an appeal by the plaintiffs from an order granting a motion for a general summary judgment made by defendant Grimes.
The complaint names Grimes as a defendant in his individual capacity and proceeds against him on two theories; first, that Grimes is liable for the negligent acts of Watson under the doctrine of respondeat superior; and, second, that Grimes was himself guilty of causative misconduct in allowing an automobile equipped with worn and slick tires, which unsafe condition Grimes allegedly knew or ought to have known, to be used in the business of his office.
The only undisputed fact that appears from the pleadings is that Grimes 'admits that at the alleged time and place Deputy Sheriff Watson was conveying a prisoner.'
Grimes does not contend that he has shown that Deputy Watson was not negligent in any regard. In an affidavit accompanying his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Merideth v. Grogan
...a refusal to correct or properly instruct such employees, amounts to a ratification of such negligent acts.'" Peavy v. Chavers, 121 Ga. App. 354, 355, 173 S.E.2d 749 (1970) (quoting Mathis v. Nelson, 79 Ga.App. 639, 54 S.E.2d 710 (1949)) (emphasis added). Plaintiffs have introduced no evide......
-
Cooper v. Ricketts
...Mathis v. Nelson, 79 Ga.App. 639, 640(3), 54 S.E.2d 710.' Parris v. Slaton, 131 Ga.App. 92(2), 205 S.E.2d 67. See also Peavy v. Chavers, 121 Ga.App. 354, 173 S.E.2d 749. Judgment BELL, C.J., and QUILLIAN, CLARK and MARSHALL, JJ., concur. WEBB, J., concurs in the judgment. DEEN, P.J., and EV......
-
Bob v. Hardy
...refusal to correct or properly instruct such employees, amounts to a ratification of such negligent act.' [cits.]" Peavy v. Chavers, 121 Ga.App. 354, 355(1), 173 S.E.2d 749. Although Mr. Brisendine testified that Moreland's signature made the plans official, he also admitted that he did not......