Case Name: Southern Railway Company v. Miller
Court: Court of Appeals of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1918-01-22
Citations: 21 Ga. App. 618
Docket Number: 8853
Parties: Southern Railway Company v. Miller.
Judges: Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.
Reporter: Georgia Appeals Reports
Volume: 21
Pages: 618–619

Head Matter:
8853.
Southern Railway Company v. Miller.
Decided January 22, 1918.
Action for damages; from city court of Hall county — Judge Wheeler. April 33, 1917.
■ Miller bought mules at Miller Union Stock Yards, Atlanta, Ga., and at his direction the vendors delivered them to the Southern Railway Company to be shipped for him to Gainesville, Ga. In this suit he sought to recover damages on account of injuries to the mules. He alleged that the injuries were caused by breach of public duty of the railway company to provide a safe means of shipment and a safe, dry, and sanitary car for the shipment of the mules, and that the company was negligent, in that the car furnished had a defective roof, through which the .rain poured into the car, and that the mules contracted pneumonia on account of the defective condition of the car, through the negligence and tortious conduct of the railway company. The defendant in its answer denied the material allegations of the plaintiff, and set up certain stipulations of a contract of affreightment, signed in the name of Miller Union Stock Yards, as owner or shipper, and made in consideration of a reduced rate of freight, in which it is stated that the shipper “has examined and has found in good order and condition the car or cars provided by the railway company for the transportation of said live stock, and hereby accepts the same and agrees that they are, as thus provided, suitable and sufficient for said purpose.” The trial of the case resulted in a verdict against the railway company, its motion for a new trial was overruled, and it excepted.

Opinion:
Luke, J.
This case is controlled by the decision of the Supreme Court in Central Ry. Co. v. James, 117 Ga. 832 (45 S. E. 223), and the decision of this court in Seaboard Air-Line Ry. v. McRae, 14 Ga. App. 94 (80 S. E. 211). The evidence did not authorize any recovery by the plaintiff, and the court erred in overruling the defendant's motion for a new trial.
Judgment reversed.
Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.
E. A. Neely, J. 0. Adams, Ed. Quillian, O. B. Faulkner, for plaintiff in error. W. B. Sloan, contra.