Georgia Court of Appeals, 1926

Reese v. Southern Railway Co.

Reese v. Southern Railway Co.
Georgia Court of Appeals · Decided May 12, 1926 · Brotles
35 Ga. App. 369; 133 S.E. 284; 1926 Ga. App. LEXIS 361

Reese v. Southern Railway Co.

Opinion of the Court

Brotles, C. J.

1. The petition, properly construed as a. whole and most strongly against the petitioner, clearly shows that the plaintiff, by the exercise of ordinary care, could have avoided the injury sued for.

(a) General allegations in a petition that the plaintiff could not have avoided the consequences of the defendant’s negligence by the exercise of ordinary care must yield, on demurrer, to the particular facts set forth, where inferences from such facts are necessarily to be drawn contradictory of the general allegations. Moore v. Seaboard Air-Line Ry. Co., 30 Ga. App. 466 (4) (118 S. E. 471).

2. Under the above-stated ruling the court did not err in dismissing the suit, on general demurrer.

Judgment affirmed.

Luhe and Bloodworth, JJ., concur. Beall & Beall, for plaintiff. Griffith & Matthews, Maddox, Matthews & Owens, for defendant.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.