Barksdale v. Jones

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Barksdale v. Jones

82 S.E. 664, 15 Ga. App. 16, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 4

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedAugust 22, 1914

Docket5150

StatusPublished

This text of 82 S.E. 664 (Barksdale v. Jones) 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

Barksdale v. Jones, 82 S.E. 664, 15 Ga. App. 16, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 4 (Ga. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Wade, J.

The burden of sustaining the traverse to the garnishee’s answer, which rested on the plaintiff, was not successfully carried by deductions unauthorized by the facts stated. Where a witness testified that he did work of the aggregate value of $14.45 for another person, who paid him $119, and that this left that person owing him $50.45, without more, the status of the mutual account between the parties as established by this evidence would not authorize a verdict for any amount against the person paying the $119. If there had been evidence of a contract for work, in payment upon which the apparent overplus was applicable, the verdict might be supported.

Judgment reversed.

Roam, J., absent.

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

Wade, J.

The burden of sustaining the traverse to the garnishee’s answer, which rested on the plaintiff, was not successfully carried by deductions unauthorized by the facts stated. Where a witness testified that he did work of the aggregate value of $14.45 for another person, who paid him $119, and that this left that person owing him $50.45, without more, the status of the mutual account between the parties as established by this evidence would not authorize a verdict for any amount against the person paying the $119. If there had been evidence of a contract for work, in payment upon which the apparent overplus was applicable, the verdict might be supported.

Judgment reversed.

Roam, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 S.E. 664, 15 Ga. App. 16, 1914 Ga. App. LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barksdale-v-jones-gactapp-1914.