U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Sanders, 36490
Decision Date | 22 January 1957 |
Docket Number | No. 2,No. 36490,36490,2 |
Citation | 94 Ga.App. 904,96 S.E.2d 531 |
Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Parties | UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY COMPANY v. W. D. SANDERS |
A. Mims Wilkinson, Jr., Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Ray Gary, Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus Opinion by the Court
1. Holland v. Boyette, 93 Ga.App. 497, 501, 92 S.E.2d 222, 224. Accordingly, on the trial of an action by the plaintiff insurance company as subrogee of its insured who suffered a fire loss due to the alleged negligence of the defendant, an independent contractor who owed the plaintiff's insured only the duty of ordinary care in sanding and refinishing her floors to avoid injury to the premises, it was error for the trial court to charge: This is true although the petition also alleged that certain acts of the defendant's employee were negligent 'and that said negligence was so reckless and wanton as to amount to gross negligence.'
2. The remaining special assignments of error are either without merit or not likely to recur. The general...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wright v. Lail, 39136
...1123; Blanchard v. Ogletree, 41 Ga.App. 4, 152 S.E. 116; Fountain v. Tidwell, 92 Ga.App. 199, 88 S.E.2d 486; United States Fidelity &c. Co. v. Sanders, 94 Ga.App. 904, 96 S.E.2d 531; Morris v. Cochran, 98 Ga.App. 786, 106 S.E.2d In the instant case there was no special demurrer on the groun......
-
Morris v. Cochran
...by the conclusions of the pleader.' See also Holland v. Boyette, 93 Ga.App. 497, 92 S.E.2d 222; United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Sanders, 94 Ga.App. 904, 96 S.E.2d 531. Since the plaintiff here did not need to allege or prove gross negligence against his driver in order to sustain h......
- Ford v. Harden