Albany Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Lowrey

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Albany Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Lowrey

88 S.E. 903, 18 Ga. App. 57, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 118

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMay 2, 1916

Docket6780

StatusPublished

This text of 88 S.E. 903 (Albany Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Lowrey) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Albany Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Lowrey, 88 S.E. 903, 18 Ga. App. 57, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 118 (Ga. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Bboyies, J.

1. There was no error in overruling the demurrer to the de fendant’s answer.

2. This was a suit in trover, and the evidence demanded a finding that the title to the property (Coca-Cola bottles) sued for, and the right of possession, were in the plaintiff; and, the undisputed evidence further showing that the property was in the possession of the defendant when the suit was filed, and that a demand for the property was made upon the defendant by the plaintiff before the suit was filed, and that this demand was refused, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff was demanded; and, consequently, the verdict rendered in favor of the defendant was contrary to law and to the evidence.

Judgment reversed.

Russell, O. J., dissents.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bboyies, J.

1. There was no error in overruling the demurrer to the de fendant’s answer.

2. This was a suit in trover, and the evidence demanded a finding that the title to the property (Coca-Cola bottles) sued for, and the right of possession, were in the plaintiff; and, the undisputed evidence further showing that the property was in the possession of the defendant when the suit was filed, and that a demand for the property was made upon the defendant by the plaintiff before the suit was filed, and that this demand was refused, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff was demanded; and, consequently, the verdict rendered in favor of the defendant was contrary to law and to the evidence.

Judgment reversed.

Russell, O. J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 S.E. 903, 18 Ga. App. 57, 1916 Ga. App. LEXIS 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/albany-coca-cola-bottling-co-v-lowrey-gactapp-1916.