Postal Tel. Cable Co v. Kelly
| Decision Date | 03 March 1910 |
| Citation | 134 Ga. 218,67 S.E. 803 |
| Parties | POSTAL TELEGRAPH CABLE CO. v. KELLY; |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Telegraphs and Telephones (§ 15*) — Injuries—Proximate Cause.
A_ telegraph company had its line of poles and wires constructed along one side of a public road. On the opposite side several men were cutting down trees for a box company. Just as one of the trees was about to fall, two of the men engaged in cutting went out into the road. As the tree, which was a tall pine, fell, it struck another tree, glanced or turned from its course, and fell in or partly across the road. Either some of its limbs or part of the other tree struck the wires of the defendant on the opposite side of the highway, breaking some of them, and a pole to which they were attached fell into the road, striking one of the two men who were standing there, causing his death. The pole was rotten at the point where it entered the ground, and a sound pole nearer the point of impact did not fall. Held that, even if the telegraph company failed to use ordinary care in inspecting and maintaining its poles, nevertheless, under the facts stated, the injury was not the legal and natural result of its negligence so as to authorize a recovery against it for the homicide. This is so, although the act of cutting down the tree may not in any sense have been negligent or wrongful. In this connection, see Perry v. Central R. Co., 66 Ga. 746; Mayor and Council of Macon v. Dykes, 103 Ga. 847, 31 S. E. 443; Henderson v. Dade Coal Co., 100 Ga. 568, 28 S. E. 251, 40 L. R, A. 95; Dubuque Wood & Coal Association v. City and County of Dubuque, 30 Iowa, 176; City of Rockford v. Tripp, 83 111. 247. 25 Am. Rep. 381; Handelun v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Ry. Co., 72 Iowa. 709, 32 N. W. 4.
(a) The ruling above made relates to the questions as to proximate cause as raised by general demurrer, and as involved in the motion for nonsuit and the general grounds of the motion for new trial; and, being controlling, it is unnecessary to deal with the grounds of the motion for new trial in detail.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Telegraphs and Telephones, Cent. Dig. § 9; Dec. Dig. § 15.*J
Error from Superior Court, Walker County; Moses Wright, Judge.
Action by Amanda Kelly, by her next friend, against the Postal Telegraph Cable Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Reversed.
Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson and John W. & G. E. Maddox, for plaintiff in error.
Lumpkin...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Standard Oil Co. v. Harris, s. 44523
...& Co. v. Kinsel, 114 Ga. 390, 392, 40 S.E. 300; Southern Transportation Co. v. Harper, 118 Ga. 672, 45 S.E. 458; Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. v. Kelly, 134 Ga. 218, 67 S.E. 803; Georgia Southern & Fla. Ry. Co. v. Corry, 149 Ga. 295, 99 S.E. 881; Blakely v. Johnson, 220 Ga. 572, 140 S.E.2d 857......
-
Gulf Oil Corp. v. Stanfield
...Macon v. Dykes, 103 Ga. 847, 848, 31 S.E. 443; Southern Transportation Co. v. Harper, 118 Ga. 672, 45 S.E. 458; Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. v. Kelly, 134 Ga. 218, 67 S.E. 803; Williams v. Grier, 196 Ga. 327, 26 S.E.2d 698; Harper v. Fulton Bag & Cotton Mills, 21 Ga.App. 322, 94 S.E. 286; Hig......
-
Georgia Power Co. v. Collum
...of the pole, but solely because Mr. Bergmann left the roadway and struck the non-negligently located pole. See Postal Telegraph-Cable Co. v. Kelly, 134 Ga. 218, 67 S.E. 803 (1909); Higginbotham v. Rome R. etc. Co., 23 Ga.App. 753, 99 S.E. 638 (1919); Mathews v. Ga. Power Co., supra. There b......
-
General Fire Extinguisher Co. v. Daniel
... ... Durham Coal & Coke Co., 131 Ga. 715, 63 S.E. 290 (2); Postal ... Telegraph Cable Co. v. Keeley, 134 Ga. 218, 67 S.E. 803 ... ...