Case Name: Hughes v. Atlanta Steel Co., and vice versa
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1911-07-25
Citations: 9 Ga. App. 510
Docket Number: 2781, 2782
Parties: Hughes v. Atlanta Steel Co., and vice versa.
Judges: 
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 9
Pages: 510–510

Head Matter:
2781, 2782.
Hughes v. Atlanta Steel Co., and vice versa.
Decided July 25, 1911.
Action for damages; from city court of Atlanta — Judge Reid. April 4-,.1910.
The question certified to the Supreme Court in this case ivas as follows: “Can a servant who was injured by the negligent conduct of an incompetent fellow servant, the incompetency being unknown to him, recover damages from a common master, arising from his breach of duty in knowingly employing' and retaining the incompetent servant, where the proof shows that at the time of the injury the plaintiff, the negligent and incompetent fellow servant, and the master were all three engaged together in the violation of a penal statute of this State, viz., in pursuit of their business and work of ordinary calling on the Sabbath day ? Penal Code (1910), § 422.” For the decision of the Supreme Court, see 136 Ga. 511 (71 S. E. 728).
F. M. Hughes, Westmoreland Brothers, for plaintiff.
Smith, Hammond & Smith, for defendant.

Opinion:
Hill, C. J.
1. The questions of law raised in the cross-bill of exceptions having been certified by this court to the Supreme Court, and that court having decided the questions adversely to the contentions of the plaintiff in error in the cross-bill, the judgment assigned as error in the cross-bill must be affirmed.
2. The judgment of the lower court in granting the motion for a new trial on a single ground must be affirmed, under the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Smith v. Maddox-Rucker Banking Co., 135 Ga. 151 (68 S. E. 1031), and the decision of this court in Holland v. Williams, 3 Ga. App. 636 (60 S. E. 331). Judgment affirmea.