Thomas v. The Ga. R.R. And Banking Co.

Decision Date31 December 1868
Citation38 Ga. 222
PartiesGEORGE M. THOMAS, plaintiff in error. v. THE GEORGIA RAILROAD AND BANKING COMPANY, defendant in error.
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court

Dismissal of appeal. Jurisdiction. By Judge Pope. DeKalb Superior Court. October Term, 1868.

Thomas brought case, in DeKalb county, against said company, for breaking his arm by the careless running of one of their hand-cars, by his fellow servants, in said county. It was notaverred where the residence of the company was, except as follows: \'\'The Georgia Railroad and Banking Company, a corporation of said State, having a portion of its road in, and doing business in, said county of DeKalb, " and that the injury to the plaintiff was done upon their road in said county.

The defendant plead the general issue. There was a trial before the petit jury against the defendant, from which defendant appealed. The appeal bond was made during the term of the Court, and was in regular form, except that the Clerk had failed to sign his name under the words "tested and approved." The security on the bond was John N. Pate.

When the cause was called for trial, plaintiff's attorneys moved to dismiss said appeal, because said bond had not been approved by the Clerk, and because the security on the bond was insolvent. In support of this motion, they proposed to show that want of approval, as aforesaid, from the minutes, and to prove by the Clerk that he failed to approve the bond, because of the insufficiency of the security, it having been objected to by plaintiff's attorneys within the four days from the adjournment of the Court allowed for appealing, and notice of this objection having been given to the agent of the company at *Decatur, DeKalb county, Georgia, within said four days. They proposed to shew the insolvency of said security. The Court refused to dismiss the appeal.

The defendant's attorneys then moved to dismiss said cause on the ground that the cause of action set forth in the declaration, (injury by a hand-car,) did not give jurisdiction to DeKalb county. The Court dismissed the case. His refusal to dismiss the appeal, and his dismissal of the case, are assigned as error.

Hill and Candler for plaintiff in error.

L. J. Glenn & Son for defendant in error.

WARNER, J.

1. There are two grounds of error assigned to the judgment of the Court below in this record. First, in refusing to dismiss the appeal; second, in dismissing the plaintiff's action for wantof jurisdiction. In our...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Boyd v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 1, 1911
    ... ... herein. Jackson v. Railroad, 104 Mo. 448; Thomas ... v. Railroad, 109 Mo. 187; Ring v. Railroad, 112 ... Mo. 220; Nugent v. Milling Co., 131 ... Railroad v. Crocker, 95 Ala. 412; Thomas v ... Banking Co., 38 Ga. 222; Perez v. Railroad, 28 ... Tex. Civ. App. 255. (2) In this case, under the ... ...
  • Johnson v. Southern Pacific Company No 32 Johnson v. Southern Pacific Company No 87
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • December 19, 1904
    ...Connecting R. Co. v. O'Hara, 150 Ill. 580, 37 N. E. 917; Kansas City, M. & B. R. Co. v. Crocker, 95 Ala. 412, 11 So. 262; Thomas v. Georgia R. & Bkg. Co. 38 Ga. 222; New York v. Third Ave. R. Co. 117 N. y. 404, 22 N. E. 755; Benson v. Chicago, St. P. M. & O. R. Co. 75 Minn. 163, 74 Am. St. ......
  • Mcgrady v. Charlotte Harbor & N. Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 16, 1913
    ... ... 143, 49 So. 745; Kansas ... City, M. & B. R. Co. v. Crocker, 95 Ala. 412, 11 So ... 262; Thomas v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co., 38 ... The ... object designed to be attained by the ... ...
  • State v. Tardiff
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • May 5, 1914
    ...a meaning which excludes the idea of a hand or lever car. Such cars are used in the ordinary business of railroads." In Thomas v. Georgia R. R. Co., 38 Ga. 222, the statute provided that railroad companies should be liable in any county in which any person or property had been injured by th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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