Burt v. Stocks Coal Co.
This text of 46 S.E. 828 (Burt v. Stocks Coal Co.) 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.
Opinion
(after stating the foregoing facts.) It is not neces'sary to determine whether Civil Code, § 2866, par. 8, was intended to make a distinction between trade and profession; for the phrase “common tools of trade” therein has uniformly been construed to refer, not to tools in common use by the debtor regardless of their value, but to those simple and inexpensive appliances used in his [630]*630■trade. Lenoir v. Weeks, 20 Ga. 596; Kirksey v. Rowe, 114 Ga. 893. Nor does the dentist chair come within the Civil Code, §2866,par. 5, exempting “one table and set of chairs sufficient for the use of the family.” Indeed it was not so scheduled when the petition was filed. The chair may be set apart, as exempt from levy and sale, .under the Civil Code, § 2827, but not under § 2866.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
46 S.E. 828, 119 Ga. 629, 1904 Ga. LEXIS 313, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burt-v-stocks-coal-co-ga-1904.