Baxley Tie Co. v. Simpson & Harper

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Baxley Tie Co. v. Simpson & Harper

57 S.E. 1090, 1 Ga. App. 670, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 71

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedApril 25, 1907

Docket270

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 57 S.E. 1090 (Baxley Tie Co. v. Simpson & Harper) 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

Baxley Tie Co. v. Simpson & Harper, 57 S.E. 1090, 1 Ga. App. 670, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 71 (Ga. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Rowell, J.

1. If no place be designated by the contract, the general rule is that the articles sold are to be delivered at the place where they are at the time of the sale. Benjamin on Sales (7th ed.), §682.

2. If the purchaser of machinery inspects the same personally or by a,n agent, and then buys, makes a cash payment, and gives his promissory note for the remainder, and receives the property, without disclosing to the seller any objection thereto until the promissory note has matured and suit has been brought thereon, he can not thereafter successfully plead the existence of patent defects, rendering the machinery worthless, as a defense to the action on the notes. Harder v. Carter, 97 Ga. 273; American Car Co. v. Atlanta Street Ry. Co., 100 Ga. 254; Lunsford v. Malsby, 101 Ga. 40; Page v. Dodson Co., 106 Ga. 80.

3. The ease being controlled by the foregoing provisions of law, the court .did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Rowell, J.

1. If no place be designated by the contract, the general rule is that the articles sold are to be delivered at the place where they are at the time of the sale. Benjamin on Sales (7th ed.), §682.

2. If the purchaser of machinery inspects the same personally or by a,n agent, and then buys, makes a cash payment, and gives his promissory note for the remainder, and receives the property, without disclosing to the seller any objection thereto until the promissory note has matured and suit has been brought thereon, he can not thereafter successfully plead the existence of patent defects, rendering the machinery worthless, as a defense to the action on the notes. Harder v. Carter, 97 Ga. 273; American Car Co. v. Atlanta Street Ry. Co., 100 Ga. 254; Lunsford v. Malsby, 101 Ga. 40; Page v. Dodson Co., 106 Ga. 80.

3. The ease being controlled by the foregoing provisions of law, the court .did not err in directing a verdict for the plaintiff.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 S.E. 1090, 1 Ga. App. 670, 1907 Ga. App. LEXIS 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baxley-tie-co-v-simpson-harper-gactapp-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack