Knight v. Bryant-Durham Electric Company, Inc., 169 Ga. App. 502, 313 S.E.2d 758 (1984)
Linked as:
Text
Percy J. Blount, for appellant.
This case involves an action for personal injury arising out of circumstances wherein the plaintiff as employee, while erecting a sign at a medical center, was hurt when a certain crane used in the erection of the sign fell when the outriggers pushed down into the ground causing it to fall. The action was brought against the defendant, Bryant-Durham Electric Company, Inc., which had allegedly excavated the area earlier in order to bury a 7500-gallon storage tank. Plaintiff contends that the defendant in performing this work "failed to use due care in covering the storage tank and failed to properly compact the ground in an area when they knew or should have known through the exercise of ordinary care that heavy machinery would be used."
Defendant denied the claim. After discovery and based on the record, the defendant moved for summary judgment having attached the affidavits of the executive vice president of the defendant and an architect testifying as to the installation of the fuel tank and both having inspected the premises where the fuel tank was located in which a 6-inch thick concrete cover was installed over the excavated area and this concrete did not have any cracks or sunken or chipped out places whatsoever. The affidavit of the executive vice president who was familiar with the work further deposed that "there was no indication of any cave-in whatsoever around the fuel tank due to the fact that the tank had been installed, tamped and compacted, and a 6-inch thick concrete cover installed around the excavated area." The motion for summary judgment was heard and granted. Plaintiff appeals. Held:
The sole enumeration of error is that the trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for summary judgment "by failing to examine depositions taken in a prior action to determine whether or not there was a material issue of fact." Examination of the record discloses that the trial court considered the motion by the plaintiff to use certain depositions taken in another court which was denied because the said motion was not filed in accordance with the local rules and OCGA
William C. Calhoun, for appellee.
Sponsored links
This document cites
- Supreme Court of Georgia - PORTER COATINGS v. STEIN STEEL & SUPPLY COMPANY et al., 247 Ga. 631, 278 S.E.2.d 377 (1981)
- Georgia Court Of Appeals - Goss Et Al. v. Thornton Et Al., 159 Ga. App. 166, 283 S.E.2d 63 (1981)
- Georgia Court Of Appeals - Wall v. Citizens &Amp; Southern Bank of Houston County., 145 Ga. App. 76, 243 S.E.2d 271 (1978)
- Georgia Court Of Appeals - Hurston v. Dealers Service Plan, Inc., 141 Ga. App. 148, 232 S.E.2d 641 (1977)
- Georgia Court Of Appeals - The Bonny Corporation v. Mccarthy Et Al., 125 Ga. App. 76, 186 S.E.2d 452 (1971)
See other documents that cite the same legislation
