Bacon Fruit Co. v. Blessing

Supreme Court of Georgia

Bacon Fruit Co. v. Blessing

50 S.E. 139, 122 Ga. 369, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 209

CourtSupreme Court of Georgia

DecidedMarch 7, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 50 S.E. 139 (Bacon Fruit Co. v. Blessing) 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

Bacon Fruit Co. v. Blessing, 50 S.E. 139, 122 Ga. 369, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 209 (Ga. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

Simmons, C. J.

1. A local custom of merchant brokers, charging $10 per car on goods bought by them for sale from shippers, is not binding on a nonresident shipper unless it be shown that he had knowledge of such custom and consented to the same. See Horan v. Strachan, 86 Ga. 408; Miller v. Moore, 83 Ga. 684.

2. Where one buys produce from another who lives in a foreign State, and agrees to pay the market price of such produce existing in two certain towns, naming them, it is inadmissible for the purchaser, in a suit brought by the seller for the price of the produce, to prove the market price in a town not named in the contract, though such town be within a distance of ten miles of one of the towns specified. Having agreed to pay the market price of the two towns named, the purchaser is bound thereby.

Judgment affirm,ed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Simmons, C. J.

1. A local custom of merchant brokers, charging $10 per car on goods bought by them for sale from shippers, is not binding on a nonresident shipper unless it be shown that he had knowledge of such custom and consented to the same. See Horan v. Strachan, 86 Ga. 408; Miller v. Moore, 83 Ga. 684.

2. Where one buys produce from another who lives in a foreign State, and agrees to pay the market price of such produce existing in two certain towns, naming them, it is inadmissible for the purchaser, in a suit brought by the seller for the price of the produce, to prove the market price in a town not named in the contract, though such town be within a distance of ten miles of one of the towns specified. Having agreed to pay the market price of the two towns named, the purchaser is bound thereby.

Judgment affirm,ed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 S.E. 139, 122 Ga. 369, 1905 Ga. LEXIS 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bacon-fruit-co-v-blessing-ga-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack