
    9931.
    Robinson v. Central of Georgia Railway Company et al.
    
    Decided July 19, 1920.
    Action for damages; from Fulton superior court—Judge Pendleton. June 7, 1918.
    After the adoption of the act of Congress of March 21, 1918, “to provide for the operation of transportation systems under Federal control,” etc., and before the issuance of General Order No. 50 by the Director-General of Railroads, this action was brought against the Central of Georgia Railway Company and a street railway company for damages on account of personal injuries alleged to have been received on the 18th day of that month because of negligence in the operation of the defendant’s cars. By demurrer the Central of Georgia Railway Company contended that the action was not maintainable against it, because its railway was not under its control, but was under Federal control, at the time of the alleged injury. The judge of the superior court refused to allow the plaintiff to- amend the petition by substituting the name of the Director-General of Railroads as party defendant, and sustained the demurrer and dismissed the action as to the Central of Georgia Railway Company; and the plaintiff excepted.
    
      Hill & Adams, for plaintiff.
    
      Little, Powell, Smith & Goldstein, Colquitt & Conyers, for defendants.
   Jenkins, P. J.

The answers of the Supreme Court to the questions certified to it by this court in this case are to the effect that while the trial court did not err in dismissing the action on the grounds set out in the demurrer, yet, under the then state of facts as disclosed by the record, the .plaintiff should be allowed to amend his petition by substituting the name of the director-general of railroads as party defendant. 150 Ga. 41 (102 S. E. 532). The judgment of the court below is therefore affirmed, but with direction that unless there should be urged some other and valid objection not made by the record as now presented, the plaintiff be allowed to amend his petition by setting up the necessary facts in regard to, and naming the proper party defendant to, the said cause; and upon such amendment being-made and allowed, the case shall stand reinstated without prejudice. Judgment affirmed, with direction. Stephens and Smith, JJ., concur.  