 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Webb v. Day6/1/2005
nner as Day had. Nor can Webb argue that Day should have known that Boling would use the forklift in an unsafe way, since " t is not sufficient . . . for a plaintiff to show constructive knowledge, i.e., that the entrustor should have known the person being entrusted was not competent." (Citation omitted.) Upshaw v. Roberts Timber Co., 266 Ga. App. 135, 137 (2) (596 SE2d 679) (2004).
3. Finally, though the trial court made no specific finding on the issue of causation, Webb contends the trial court erroneously concluded that Day did not proximately cause Webb's injuries.
Causation is one of the elements of a negligence claim. "To recover for injuries caused by another's negligence, a plaintiff must show four elements: a duty, a breach of that duty, causation and damages." (Citations and punctuation omitted.) Johnson v. American Nat. Red Cross, 276 Ga. 270, 272 (1) (578 SE2d 106) (2003). Since Webb has failed to show evidence of a failure by Day to conform to a recognized duty or obligation, we need not reach the question whether there was a sufficiently close causal connection between Day's conduct and Webb's injury.
Judgment affirmed. Blackburn, P. J., and Bernes, J., concur.
|