Dawson Paper Shell Pecan Co. v. Bush

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Dawson Paper Shell Pecan Co. v. Bush

92 S.E. 302, 19 Ga. App. 793, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 359

Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided April 25, 1917·No. 8024·Published

Opinion

Wade, C. J.

1. The court did not err in overruling the demurrer. There .was evidence from which the jury was authorized to infer that the delivery was so made as to place the goods sold entirely beyond the control of the vendor and completely within the control' of the vendee (Brunswick Grocery Co. v. Lamar, 116 Ga. 1, 4, 42 S. E. 366), and that the contract of sale had been fully executed by the vendor, in accordance with the terms of his parol agreement.

2. The charge of the court substantially covered the material issues in this ease, and there ivas no reversible error in refusing the requests submitted! Judgment affirmed.

George and Luke, JJ., concur.

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

Wade, C. J.

1. The court did not err in overruling the demurrer. There .was evidence from which the jury was authorized to infer that the delivery was so made as to place the goods sold entirely beyond the control of the vendor and completely within the control' of the vendee (Brunswick Grocery Co. v. Lamar, 116 Ga. 1, 4, 42 S. E. 366), and that the contract of sale had been fully executed by the vendor, in accordance with the terms of his parol agreement.

2. The charge of the court substantially covered the material issues in this ease, and there ivas no reversible error in refusing the requests submitted! Judgment affirmed.

George and Luke, JJ., concur.

Dawson Paper Shell Pecan Co. v. Bush, 92 S.E. 302, 19 Ga. App. 793, 1917 Ga. App. LEXIS 359 (Ga. Ct. App. 1917).

Pincite

92 S.E. 302 (Dawson Paper Shell Pecan Co. v. Bush) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related