Sanders v. Yates, 20495

• Decision Date: 08 July 1959
• Docket Number: No. 20495,20495
• Parties: Richard SANDERS et al. v. Andrew Thomas YATES et al.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

Page 739

109 S.E.2d 739

215 Ga. 218

Richard SANDERS et al. v. Andrew Thomas YATES et al.

No. 20495.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

July 8, 1959.

Syllabus by the Court.

The petition by the plaintiffs, residents of Walker County, Georgia, seeking to enjoin the defendants, residents of Walker County, Georgia, from prosecuting a pending suit in the Circuit Court of Hamilton County, Tennessee, against the plaintiffs for damages arising out of an alleged cause of action originating in Walker County, Georgia, which alleged facts showing that the purpose or necessary effect of the Tennessee action was to obtain an unconscionable or inequitable advantage to which the plaintiffs in such action would not be entitled in the domicile of the parties, was improperly dismissed on demurrer.

Frank M. Gleason, Rossville, for plaintiffs in error.

Langford & Stolz, LaFayette, for defendants in error.

ALMAND, Justice.

The judgment under review is one sustaining the general and special demurrers to an equitable petition seeking to enjoin the defendants, residents of Walker County, Georgia, from further prosecuting, in the Circuit Court of Hamilton County, Chattanooga, Tennessee, their suit against the plaintiffs, who are residents of Walker County, Georgia, for damages growing out of an automobile accident in Walker County, Georgia.

The petition of the plaintiffs stated the following case for equitable intervention: All witnesses (except medical) reside in Walker County, and cannot be compelled to appear in the courts of Tennessee. Under the laws of Georgia, a guest cannont recover from his host unless he proves gross negligence in the operation of the motor vehicle, whereas under the laws of Tennessee a guest may recover from a host by proof of want of ordinary care, or simple negligence. The plaintiffs cannot compel witnesses residing in Georgia to appear before a court commission to give evidence in the form of depositions for use in the courts of another state. The plaintiff James Sanders was served with process in Tennessee while he was at his place of employment; the plaintiff Richard Sanders was driven into Tennessee by the defendant Douglas Sanders, who knew that the plaintiff Richard Sanders was going to the unemployment office to receive unemployment benefits, and he was served with process as he was walking out of the unemployment office. The defendants have taken an unfair, inequitable, and unconscionable advantage over the plaintiffs, and if they are permitted to continue prosecution of such action, the plaintiffs will be deprived of the right of due process of law, and will be put to great expense. No valid reason exists for the selection of a forum...