Case Threshing Machine Co. v. Thurmond
This text of 85 S.E. 1020 (Case Threshing Machine Co. v. Thurmond) 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
1. If the counter-claim set up against the plaintiff by the defendant in his plea be treated as one arising ex contractu, it was the subject-matter of set-off. If it be treated as one arising ex delicto, it was alleged that the plaintiff was a non-resident corporation, and that he should be allowed to plead an equitable set-off. In either event, there was no error in refusing to strike the plea on the ground that it sought to set off damages for a tort against a suit on a contract. See, in this connection, Bibb Land-Lumber Co. v. Lima Machine Works, 104 Ga. 116 (30 S. E. 676, 31 S. E. 401); Hecht v. Snook, 114 Ga. 921, 924-5 (41 S. E. 74); Arnold v. Carter, 125 Ga. 319-325 (54 S. E. 177).
2. There -was sufficient evidence to support the verdict, and there was no error in overruling the motion for a new trial.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
85 S.E. 1020, 144 Ga. 21, 1915 Ga. LEXIS 21, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/case-threshing-machine-co-v-thurmond-ga-1915.