Terrell v. J.F. Giddings & Son

Decision Date14 June 1922
Docket Number13037.
Citation112 S.E. 914,28 Ga.App. 697
PartiesTERRELL v. J. F. GIDDINGS & SON.
CourtGeorgia Court of Appeals

Syllabus by the Court.

The declaration in attachment, filed in behalf of a 14 year old girl, for damages from personal injuries, in effect alleged that while the defendant was engaged in grading and soiling a public road its vice principal in charge of the work negligently and wantonly and without necessity placed and left in and near the mouth of a public sewer on a described public road a highly explosive and dangerous dynamite cap which was attractively wrapped in paper and placed in a small box, that a named boy, 12 years of age, attracted by its appearance, but because of his tender years unaware of its nature or dangerous character, carried it to the home of the petitioner, who, being also of tender years and unaware of its dangerous character, took the dynamite cap from the boy and in playing with it scratched it with a pin, causing an explosion, which resulted in the injuries sued for. The petition charges negligence (1) in thus placing the dynamite cap where persons might discover it and receive injuries therefrom; (2) in not properly safeguarding the sewer where it was placed, so that the cap could not be removed by children; and (3) in carelessly, wantonly, and without necessity so placing the cap in total disregard of life. The court sustained a general demurrer to the petition. Held:

If, as contended by counsel for the defendant in error, the defendant did not owe the plaintiff any legal duty which it neglected to perform, no action could be maintained for negligence on its part. Actionable negligence does not exist in the absence of the breach of some legal duty. Savannah, etc., Ry. Co. v. Beavers, 113 Ga. 398, 39 S.E. 82, 54 L.R.A. 314. The entire absence of blame on the part of a plaintiff does not, therefore, necessarily establish a fault on the part of a defendant, since an accident may be a mere casualty, for which no one is to blame. Chenall v. Palmer Brick Co., 117 Ga. 106, 43 S.E. 443; Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v Danneman, 25 Ga.App. 43, 102 S.E. 542. But all persons are presumed to anticipate the reasonable and natural consequences of their own conduct, and it was a question for the jury whether the defendant ought to have anticipated an injury such as is alleged in the petition as a reasonable and natural consequence of its alleged conduct in placing the attractively wrapped and highly...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • Terrell v. Son
    • United States
    • Georgia Court of Appeals
    • 14 Junio 1922
    ...28 Ga.App. 697112 S.E. 914TERRELL .v.J. F. GIDDINGS & SON.(No. 13037.)Court of Appeals of Georgia, Division No. 2.June 14, 1922.(Syllabus by the Court.)Error from City Court of Newnan; W. A. Post, ... ...

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT