Anderson v. Freeman

75 Ga. 93
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedJanuary 12, 1886
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 75 Ga. 93 (Anderson v. Freeman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Anderson v. Freeman, 75 Ga. 93 (Ga. 1886).

Opinion

Blandford, Justice.

Freeman sued Anderson upon a contract for wages as clerk, and the main question was whether he had been discharged without sufficient cause. The -evidence shows that Anderson formed a partnership with Fuller before the term of service of Freeman expired; that Freeman entered into the service of Anderson & Fuller, and after remaining awhile, he charged up to Anderson & Fuller one hundred and fifty dollars for one month’s wages, and paid himself out of their funds, whereas he was only (o have seventy-five dollars per month under his contract with Anderson, no new contract having been made after the formation of the new firm of Anderson & Fuller

Anderson offered him the same wages which he had been paying him; Freeman declined, contending that, as he had to keep the books of Anderson and Anderson & Fuller, it was double labor, and he should have more wages. He had paid himself one hundred and fifty dollars out of the funds of Anderson & Fuller for one month’s wages; this was done without their knowledge or consent. He having refused to continue his employment with Anderson & Fuller at the same wages which Anderson had agreed to pay him, he was discharged. A.verdict was rendered for Freeman, a motion made for new trial, which was refused, and error is assigned thereon.

We are of opinion that a new trial should have been granted in this case. When Anderson formed a partnership with Fuller, of the same nature and characte r of business which he had formerly carried on, and Freeman entered into the seiwice of the new firm, his contract with Anderson individually was at an end; and if he had been paid by Anderson his wages up to the formation of the [95]*95firm of Anderson & Fuller, which it appears he had been, then he cannot recover from Anderson.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

DeRosa v. Shiah
421 S.E.2d 718 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
75 Ga. 93, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/anderson-v-freeman-ga-1886.