Skip to main content
· 5/20/1918

Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Cox

Citations

  • 75 Fla. 714
  • 79 So. 276

Syllabus

<p>1. Where one 'of the acts of negligence charged against a railway company for personal injuries, is the absence of proper ' light or lights, it is not necessary for the pleader to allege any purpose that such light would serve, or the various ways in which an injury might occur by reason of their absence.</p> <p>2. In actions against railroad companies when negligence is charged, it is only necessary to allege the ultimate facts that show the negligence of the defendant coupled with an averment that they were negligently done.</p> <p>3. While a railroad company is not held to as high a degree of care to prevent injury to trespassers as is required by law in the cases 'of passengers, employees and licensees, yet under the statute where injury by the operation of the train of a railroad company is shown, there is liability of the defendant for damages unless the railroad company shall make it appear that it had exercised all ordinary and reasonable care and diligence to avoid the injury.</p> <p>4. A railroad company owes a duty both to a passanger and a licensee, but the degree of care and diligence that it is required to exercise towards a trespasser is not so great as towards a licensee.</p> <p>5. A railroad company is liable for injury to a trespasser, if by the exercise of proper care and diligence under all the circumstances of the ease it could have avoided injuring him.</p> <p>6. Under Sections 3148 and 3149 of the General Statutes of 1906, a plaintiff is not debarred from recovering against a railroad company for personal injuries unless the injury was caused by his own negligence, or by his consent, and where the negligence of the plaintiff and the defendant produces the injury, the plaintiff’s damages are to be diminished by the jury in proportion to the default attributed to him.</p> <p>7. . Where a railroad company has knowledge of, and acquiesces in the use by the public of a foot path along its right-of-way, in the vicinity of a settlement, there is i

Judges: Browne, Ellis, Taylor, West, Whitfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.