DocketNumber: 43859
Citation Numbers: 119 Ga. App. 182, 166 S.E.2d 401, 1969 Ga. App. LEXIS 1033
Judges: Eberhardt
Filed Date: 2/12/1969
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 10/19/2024
Plaintiff’s unoccupied Volkswagen, parked in a lot at the northwest corner of Harris and Ivy Streets in Atlanta, was damaged when an unoccupied cab of the Red Top Cab Company rolled from where it had been parked on Harris Street onto the lot, striking a Chevrolet and causing it to strike plaintiff’s Volkswagen.
Plaintiff sued Plywood Supply Company, álong with the Red Top Cab Company and James A. Lacy (apparently the taxi driver) seeking to recover his damages, alleging that one of them, or a combination of them, had negligently allowed the unoccupied cab to roll from the street into the parking lot and cause the damage.
In opposition plaintiff presented the affidavit of Lee C. Horne, who asserted that as he drove along Harris Street he saw the unoccupied cab of Red Top Cab Company, and saw a truck of Plywood Supply Company as it was being parked in front of the taxi, headed east, and at a distance of some six feet from it. After Horne parked his vehicle in a lot on the south side of Harris Street he noticed that the taxicab had rolled downward across the street and into a parking lot on the north side and had struck a vehicle parked there. The truck of Plywood Supply Company was still parked where he had seen the driver place it.
Plaintiff opposed the motion for summary judgment on the ground that there is conflict in the affidavits of Worthy and Horne, in that Worthy had stated that there were no vehicles immediately in front of or back of the truck when he left it parked, while Horne stated that he saw the truck when Worthy parked it and that it was at a distance of some six feet in front of the taxicab.
From a denial of the motion for summary judgment defendant Plywood appeals, the court having certified that its order was an appropriate one for appeal. Held:
The affidavits presented in connection with and in opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment clearly demonstrate the lack of any basis for recovery against defendant Plywood. Even if the contended conflict in the affidavits could be said to raise some question as to how far the cab was parked behind the truck it does not appear that the truck had anything whatever to do with the rolling of the cab across the street and into the parking lot on the north
Denial of the motion for summary judgment was error. See Myers v. Phillips, 197 Ga. 536, 542 (29 SE2d 700); Crutcher v. Crawford Land Co., 220 Ga. 298 (138 SE2d 580) ; Ussery v. Koch, 115 Ga. App. 463 (154 SE2d 879).
Judgment reversed.