Booker v. Small & Sons

94 S.E. 999, 147 Ga. 566, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 35
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided January 18, 1918·No. No. 243·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

1. The evidence authorized the verdict.

2. The charge of the court to the jury that “A wife has the right to assume the debts of the husband after his death, if she so chooses,” was not erroneous. Mize v. Hawkins, 54 Ga. 501; Walker v. Walker, 139 Ga. 547 (7a), 549 (77 S. E. 795).

3. The request to review and reverse the decisions just cited has been considered and is denied.

Judgment affirmed.

All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.

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

Booker v. Small & Sons, 94 S.E. 999, 147 Ga. 566, 1918 Ga. LEXIS 35 (Ga. 1918).

94 S.E. 999 (Booker v. Small & Sons) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Callaway v. DuBose
80 S.E.2d 62 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1954)
Leatherman v. J. Austin Dillon Company
13 S.E.2d 94 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1941)
Montgomery v. Padgett
144 S.E. 41 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1928)