Cline v. Schofield
This text of 87 S.E. 149 (Cline v. Schofield) 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.
Opinion
All the evidence in this case clearly discloses that before the action of trover was brought, the plaintiff parted with the title to the property. There was an identification of the thing sold, an agreement as to the price to be paid, and consent of the parties. Civil Code, § 4106. The amount which by agreement was to be allowed for the article sold, as a credit on the price of another article to be purchased by the plaintiff, furnished a sufficient consideration. The trial judge did not err 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
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
87 S.E. 149, 17 Ga. App. 409, 1915 Ga. App. LEXIS 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cline-v-schofield-gactapp-1915.