Peacock v. Sheffield

6 Citing cases

  1. Clements v. Long

    167 Ga. App. 11 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983)   Cited 5 times

    See OCGA § 24-4-4 (formerly Code § 38-107). See also in this connection Sparks v. Porcher, 109 Ga. App. 334, 342 ( 136 S.E.2d 153); Evans v. Caldwell, 45 Ga. App. 193 ( 163 S.E. 920); Higdon Grocery Co. v. Faircloth, 107 Ga. App. 558 ( 130 S.E.2d 760); Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116, 120-121 (2) ( 153 S.E.2d 619). Under the circumstances here we are unable to hold as a matter of law that the guest passenger was afforded a reasonable opportunity to take appropriate action to avoid being killed with reference to his opportunity to save himself from the wantonness or carelessness of the host driver. The court erred in granting summary judgment for the defendant driver.

  2. Thorpe v. Thorpe

    196 Ga. App. 499 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990)   Cited 2 times

    The sole purpose of a j.n.o.v. is to permit the trial court to review and reconsider its ruling on the antecedent motion for directed verdict. Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116, 119 (1) ( 153 S.E.2d 619) (1967). The denial of a motion for j.n.o.v. is proper unless the evidence demanded a verdict contrary to that returned by the jury.

  3. Revco Discount Drug Centers of Georgia v. Famble

    326 S.E.2d 532 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 5 times

    ]" Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. v. Mitcham, 127 Ga. App. 102, 105 (2) ( 192 S.E.2d 549) (1972). See also Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116, 119 (1) ( 153 S.E.2d 619) (1967); Adams v. Smith, 129 Ga. App. 850, 853 (6) ( 201 S.E.2d 639) (1973); J. C. Penney Co. v. Davis Davis, 158 Ga. App. 169 (1) ( 279 S.E.2d 461) (1981). Therefore, this enumeration is without merit.

  4. Tucker v. Southern Bell Tel. c. Co.

    235 S.E.2d 390 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979)   Cited 1 times
    In Tucker we said: "Tucker concedes that in view of the exculpatory contractual provision he must show wilful or wanton conduct or conduct so charged with indifference to the consequences as to justify the jury finding a wantonness equivalent in spirit to actual intent to injure him in order for him to recover from Southern Bell in this case."

    [Cits.]' Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116, 121 ( 153 S.E.2d 619) (1967); Macon Tel. Pub. Co. v. Graden, 79 Ga. App. 230 (1d) ( 53 S.E.2d 371) (1949)." Southern Bell Tel. c. Co. v. C S Realty Co., 141 Ga. App. 216, 218 (1b) ( 233 S.E.2d 9).

  5. Southern Bell v. C S Realty Co.

    141 Ga. App. 216 (Ga. Ct. App. 1977)   Cited 26 times
    In Southern Bell Tel. Tel. Co. v. C S Rlty., 141 Ga. App. 216, 233 S.E.2d 9, 12 (1977) the record was that "[o]ut of some 345,000 Yellow Page entries processed, there was an overall error rate of one half of one percent."

    [Cits.]" Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116, 121 ( 153 S.E.2d 619) (1967); Macon Tel. Pub. Co. v. Graden, 79 Ga. App. 230 (1(d)) ( 53 S.E.2d 371) (1949). There was no factual dispute here that the listing for C S Realty was omitted from the 1972 white pages or that the omission was caused by an error on the part of an employee of Southern Bell.

  6. McClurd v. Reddick

    135 Ga. App. 136 (Ga. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 4 times

    These were all issues which were within the peculiar province of the jury. Mathis-Akins c., Inc. v. Tucker, 127 Ga. App. 699 (1) ( 194 S.E.2d 604); Peacock v. Sheffield, 115 Ga. App. 116 (2) ( 153 S.E.2d 619); Long Const. Co. v. Ryals, 102 Ga. App. 66 (1) ( 115 S.E.2d 726); Cox v. Norris, 70 Ga. App. 580 (3) ( 28 S.E.2d 888). Cf. Jones v. Aaron, 124 Ga. App. 738 ( 186 S.E.2d 132).