Crankshaw v. Piedmont Driving Club, Inc.

Citation. 156 S.E.2d 208 (Ga. App. 1967)

Powered by

Law Students: Don’t know your Bloomberg Law login? Register here

Citation156 S.E.2d 208 (Ga. App. 1967)

Brief Fact Summary.

Crankshaw filed a negligence suit against Piedmont Driving Club, Inc. when she broke her hip slipping on her friend’s vomit.

Synopsis of Rule of Law.

A plaintiff cannot recover for a negligence claim if the damages are only the possible result of a tortious act.

Points of Law - Legal Principles in this Case for Law Students.

The court must assume this burden where a jury can draw but one reasonable conclusion if the facts alleged are proved, that conclusion being that the acts of the defendant were not the proximate cause of the injury.

View Full Point of Law

Harris felt sick and went to the restroom after eating at Piedmont Driving Club, Inc. (Piedmont). Crankshaw broke her hip after she went to the restroom to check on Harris and slipped on Harris’s vomit. Crankshaw filed a negligence suit against Piedmont claiming that the food was the proximate cause of her injury, and the trial court dismissed.

Issue.

Whether a plaintiff can recover for a negligence claim if the damages are only the possible result of a tortious act?

Held.

Yes. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Crankshaw’s fall was too far removed from poisonous food to constitute proximate cause.

Discussion.

A plaintiff cannot recover for a negligence claim if the damages are only the possible result of a tortious act. The damages incurred by the plaintiff must be the natural result of the act in order to constitute proximate cause.