Flanders v. Atlanta Terminal Co.
Flanders v. Atlanta Terminal Company and vice versa
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Luke, J.
This case arose as an action to recover damages for alleged negligence of the defendant in maintaining steps in its railroad station for passengers to descend to reach trains. The steps were covered with rubber and iron that had grown sleek from use, and on the day of *813 the ■ alleged injury they were wet, and by reason thereof were more sleek. The plaintiff testified, that she was on her way down the steps, carrying several bundles, when suddenly she slipped and fell, suffering injuries; and that she did not know what caused her to fall. Her daughter testified, that she was with her at the time of the fall, but did not know what caused it; that about ten minutes after the plaintiff had fallen, arisen, and got on the train, the witness came back to ascend the steps, and while there made an examination and saw where a mark was made on the steps, as if some one had slipped; and that it appeared to be where the plaintiff had slipped,and fallen. Held: No presumption of negligence having been raised by proof of injury, the evidence did not sustain the petition and the allegations of negligence, and it was not error to grant a nonsuit.
Decided March 12, 1918. Action for damages; from Fulton superior court — Judge Pendleton. May 1, 1917. E. M. & G. F. Mitchell, R. R. Arnold, for plaintiff. Brewster, Howell & Heyman, for defendant.
Judgment affirmed on main till of exceptions.
Cross-till dismissed. Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., Concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.