O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
The operator of a motor vehicle owes to passengers therein the same duty of ordinary care owed to others.
History
(Code 1933, § 105-104.1, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 1283, § 1; Code 1981, § 51-1-36, enacted by Ga. L. 1982, p. 1283, § 2.)
Annotations
Cross references. - Settlement offers and agreement for personal injury, bodily injury, and death from motor vehicle, § 9-11-67.1.
Law reviews. - For article criticizing
Georgia’s traditional rules for determining choice of law questions and discussing available alternatives, see 34 Mercer L. Rev. 787 (1983).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Slight degree of care no longer sufficient. - Prior to the enactment of O.C.G.A. § 51-1-36, a host driver owed only a duty to exercise a slight degree of care in regard to passengers in the driver’s motor vehicle. Bostwick v. Flanders, 171 Ga. App. 93, 318 S.E.2d 801 (1984). No retroactive application of change in ‘‘guest passenger’’ rule. - Trial court did not err in refusing to apply O.C.G.A. § 51-1-36, changing the ‘‘guest passenger’’ rule as to the duty owed by an automobile operator to passengers to ordinary care, to a case involving a January
1981 accident, since, although a statute is ‘‘remedial’’ which affects only the procedure and practice of the courts and thus may be retroactive in application, the ‘‘guest passenger’’ rule established the duty owed by an automobile owner or operator to a nonpaying guest passenger, and there is nothing in the enactment of that section which discloses a legislative intent to apply the terms thereof retroactively. Rider v. Taylor, 166 Ga. App. 474, 304 S.E.2d 557 (1983). Cited in Powell v. Clanton, 173 Ga. App. 363, 326 S.E.2d 495 (1985).
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Modern status of choice of law in application of automobile guest statutes, 63 ALR4th 167.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1983–1987 · leading case:
Malan v. Lewis, 693 P.2d 661 (Utah 1984).
Malan v. Lewis, 693 P.2d 661 (Utah 1984).
· cites it 2× “Code § 8-01-63 (1977); Texas' guest statute applies only to guests who are in the second degree of consanguinity or affinity to the host, Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 6701b (Vernon 1977).”
Rider v. Taylor, 304 S.E.2d 557 (Ga. Ct. App. 1983).
· cites it 6× “” OCGA § 51-1-36 (formerly Code Ann. § 105-104.”
Universal Sec. Ins. v. Lowery, 354 S.E.2d 840 (Ga. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 8× “We conclude that under OCGA § 33-7-11 (b) (2) the corroboration may be provided by another occupant in the vehicle in which the claimant was injured, and the policy's exclusion is nugatory. Judgment affirmed.”
Bostwick v. Flanders, 318 S.E.2d 801 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 3× “The incident which gave rise to the instant lawsuit occurred before the effective date of OCGA § 51-1-36, which provides that “[t]he operator of a motor vehicle owes to passengers therein the same duty of ordinary care owed to others.”
Levine v. Keene, 344 S.E.2d 684 (Ga. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “Levine was seriously injured when the tractor-trailer ran off the road, and Keene also was injured and remembers nothing of the collision.”
Smith v. Thompson, 326 S.E.2d 244 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “(On November 1, 1982, OCGA § 51-1-36 became effective and established the duty of ordinary care of drivers to all persons.”
Powell v. Clanton, 326 S.E.2d 495 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “While a guest passenger need only show ordinary negligence on the part of the host driver, OCGA § 51-1-36, the appellant presented no evidence of negligence or evidence from which such negligence might reasonably be inferred.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.