Pittman v. Staples

• Decision Date: 30 January 1957
• Docket Number: No. 36385,No. 1,36385,1
• Citation: 97 S.E.2d 630,95 Ga. App. 187
• Parties: G. F. PITTMAN et al. v. Rosa W. STAPLES
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

Page 630

97 S.E.2d 630

95 Ga.App. 187

G. F. PITTMAN et al. v.Rosa W. STAPLES.

No. 36385.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 1.

Jan. 30, 1957.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 22, 1957.

Syllabus by the Court

The trial judge did not err in overruling the general demurrer to the petition.

Mrs. Rosa White Staples filed an action for damages against George F. Pittman and Macon Brick & Block Company in Bibb Superior Court.The petition alleged in part: 'That on the 16th day of June, 1954, approximately 4:30 p.m., her son, Charles White, was an invited guest and passenger in a 1941Ford Tudor sedan, being driven by Jepty Truman Staples; that said automobile was not the property of petitioner or petitioner's son and neither petitioner nor her son was exercising any control, direction or in any way governing the operation of said automobile; that said automobile in which petitioner's son was riding was traveling north on Georgia HighwayNo. 247, in the direction of the City Of Macon, Bibb County, Georgia, said highway being further described as the Macon-Warner Robins Highway; that the defendant, Macon Brick & Block Company, owned and used one 1951 Chevrolet tractor-trailer unit in and about their business operations, and were in fact using same in their business operations at the time and place of the occurrence of the injuries complained of in this petition; that George F. Pittman, defendant, was an agent and employee of said defendant, Macon Brick & Block Company, and was in control of said tractor-trailer and was acting within the scope of his employment and about his master's business at the time and place of the occurrence of the injuries and damages complained of herein; said truck was a tractor-trailer, the body of the trailer being flat with no sides and being unloaded, and both the tractor and trailer being a faded red color, the trailer being 30 feet long and the trailer body being about 6 inches thick; because of the size, shape and color of said tractor-trailer combination, it was difficult for a motorist approaching from the rear to make a proper estimate of the distance that the rearmost portion of said tractor-trailer was from the driver approaching from the rear or to make a proper determination as to whether said tractor-trailer was in motion or not; that the defendant, George F. Pittman, in pursuance of the business of his principal, Macon Brick & Block Company, was traceling north on Georgia State HighwayNo. 247, traveling toward the City of Macon, county and State aforesaid, said highway being of asphalt construction and consisting of four lanes, two being used for northbound traffic and being together about 24 feet in width, and two being used for south-bound traffic and being together about 24 feet in width, the two north-bound lanes being separated from the two south-bound lanes by an unpaved section of earth about 41 feet in width; upon reaching a point on said highway directly across from Bateman's Peach Shed, said vehicle came to a complete stop in that lane of traffic furthermost to the right of a person facing north of said highway, and was situated thereon so that all of the wheels of said tractor-trailer unit were in said lane; that defendant, Macon Brick & Block Company, through its agent Pittman did then and there abandon said tractor-trailer without moving the same; that no warning devices, either flags, signs or signals, were placed on or about said vehicle to warn approaching motorists of the fact that said tractortrailer was stopped on and obstructing the aforesaid lane; that said highway at the time and place of the abandonment of said tractor-trailer by defendant Pittman was heavily traveled by the public, which by the exercise of ordinary care and prudence should have been known to said defendants; that at the point where the defendant Pittman stopped the tractor-trailer there was approximately 30 feet of shoulder on which a truck of the type he was driving could be parked.

'Petitioner further alleges that the automobile in which petitioner's son was a passenger was traveling at a speed of about 45 miles per hour, and that said automobile had just completed the passing of an automobile that was immediately in front of the automobile driven by Staples, and traveling in the same direction as the automobile in which your petitioner's son was a passenger, and was in the process of returning to the extreme right lane, such lane being that lane which was more completely described previously as that in which defendant's truck was stopped, said automobile which was passed by the automobile in which the plaintiff's son was riding being about 100 yards distant from the defendant's truck; that immediately after passing aforementioned automobile, and while in the process of returning to the extreme right lane as previously described, the defendant's truck was first observed by the driver of the automobile in which your petitioner's son was a passenger, said truck being at that time approximately 100 yards distant from said automobile and stopped in the negligent manner hereinbefore and hereinafter described; that the driver of the said automobile thought that the truck was moving forward in a direction away from him until he had approached within a few yards of the said truck; that said Staples had his vehicle under control and was operating same in a safe and prudent manner and did everything in his power to avoid collision when the negligently stopped tractor-trailer of the defendant became apparent to him; and more specifically, that said Staples did remove his foot from the accelerator of the automobile which he was driving and did attempt to turn said automobile to the left and thus avoid collision with the defendant's negligently stopped...