The Cent. Rai1r0ad v. Harmon

• Decision Date: 28 February 1884
• Citation: 72 Ga. 742
• Parties: The Central Rai1r0ad . vs. Gleason & Harmon.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

72 Ga. 742

The Central Rai1r0ad . vs. Gleason & Harmon.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

FEBRUARY TERM, 1884.

Railroads. Damages. Negligence. Warehouses. Before Judge Harden. City Court of Savannah. July Term, 1883.

Gleason & Harmon brought suit against the Central Railroad, to recover for a mule alleged to have been fatally injured by stepping into a crack negligently left by defendant in the flooring of its cotton yard, where this and other dray mules were commonly driven.

This case will be found reported in 69 Ga., 200. On the second trial, the jury found for plaintiffs $175 00, with interest. Defendant moved for a new trial, on the following among other grounds:

(1.) Because the verdict was contrary to law and evidence.

(2.) Because the court refused to give certain requests in charge in the language requested.

(3.) Because the court charged as follows: "If it is shown that damage occurred on account of this place not being in proper repair, it is for the railroad company to show that it used all ordinary care and diligence in keeping it in repair, as the burden is on them to show it; it is a matter of no importance what witness it is shown by; the burden is on the company, and it is necessary for it to appear."

(4.) Because the court charged as follows: "If he (meaning the driver of the truck) has used diligence (meaning ordinary care and diligence), and if he (meaning plaintiff's property) has been injured, even though it may be to some extent his fault, still the railroad company would be liable, if it were also at fault; but the amount of the damages would be reduced by the amount of negligence on his part; and you should apportion it among the parties according to the amount of fault on each side."

The motion was overruled, and defendant excepted.

Lawton & Cunningham, for plaintiff in error.

Charlton & Mackall, by S. B. Adams, for defendants.

Blandford, Justice.

1. A railroad company which owns a warehouse or place of deposit for goods and freight which are to be delivered to consignees stands upon the same footing as to liability for injuries to persons and property, by reason of not having safe and secure roads and ways for ingress and egress to and from said freight, as any other person; the liability is the same, no greater, no less.

When this case was before this court at the September term, 1882, 69 Ga., 200, it was held, " that where a railroad company had a cotton yard, it was the duty of the company to keep the yard and flooring...