Downs v. Berryman

100 S.E. 226, 24 Ga. App. 170, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 474
Court of Appeals of Georgia·Decided September 18, 1919·No. 10103·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Stephens, J.

1. In an action of trover where the plaintiff elects to take a money verdict, a nonsuit is properly awarded where there is no proof of the value of the property. Moats v. Farks, 17 Ga. App. 778 (18 S. E. 685), and eases there cited. The defendant in such action, by the giving of a replevy bond, which is required by law to be in “double the amount sworn to” by the plaintiff as the value of the property in the latter’s application for bail, does not admit the value of the property, and such bond is not prima facie evidence of such value.

2. The agreed price of property as stated in a contract of sale is not evidence of the value of the property in a trover suit against one who was not a party to the contract of sale.

Judgment affirmed..

Broyles, P. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

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

Downs v. Berryman, 100 S.E. 226, 24 Ga. App. 170, 1919 Ga. App. LEXIS 474 (Ga. Ct. App. 1919).

100 S.E. 226 (Downs v. Berryman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Todd v. Hodges
262 S.E.2d 613 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1979)
Home Insurance v. Cook
99 S.E.2d 567 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1957)
Hobbs v. Tindol
124 S.E. 112 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1924)