Foster v. Leeper & Menafee

29 Ga. 294
CourtSupreme Court of Georgia
DecidedAugust 15, 1859
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 29 Ga. 294 (Foster v. Leeper & Menafee) 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.

Bluebook
Foster v. Leeper & Menafee, 29 Ga. 294 (Ga. 1859).

Opinion

— Lumpkin J.

By the Court.

delivering the opinion.

[1.]Was Foster a competent witness for the plaintiffs ? We hold that he was upon the authority of the Central Railroad & Banking Co., vs. Hines, Perkins & Co., (19 Ga. Rep. 203.,) with which we are satisfied.

[2.] Was the Court right in excluding as testimony from the jury, a copy of a letter, purporting to have beén written by defendant to Foster, the 12th of March, 1857? We think so; for this reason, amongst others, that it did not appear that the original was ever received by him, or even that it was sent.

[3.] Does this case come within the statute of frauds ? We think not. The letters of the defendant contain a sufficient acknowledgement of the contract.

[4.] The request asked of the Court was not law, even • admitting that the bacon was to be delivered, and paid for,, between the 2Cth of March and the 1st of April, 1857. If the plaintiff called on the 18th of March to get the bacony in accordance with the wishes of the defendants, as communicated in their letter, and was informed by them that they could not comply with their contract, for that they had sold the bacon bought for him to others, that dispensed with any future or further demand or offer to comply with their contract by Foster, & Co.

[5.] Nor do we think the recovery excessive. Defendants proposed to sell Foster sides at 12-J or 13 cents, and that is the best proof of what bacon was worth at the time. And the clerk of defendants testifies that the difference between the price of sides and the hog round, was from 1 to 3^-cents. This will leave a margin sufficiently broad to cover the damages, and that too after deducting the expenses of furnishing casks and packing.

[6.] The evidence, we think, was ample to support the verdict. This isa plain case; the price of bacon rose, and the defendants considered it better to risk a recovery in [298]*298damages rather than comply with their contract. The jury-likely did right.

Judgment reversed.

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

Related

Gordon v. Beck & Gregg Hardware Co.
40 S.E.2d 428 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1946)
Myers v. Adcock
31 S.E.2d 160 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1944)
Parsons v. State
84 S.E. 974 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1915)
Capital City Brick Co. v. Atlanta Ice & Coal Co.
63 S.E. 562 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1909)
Pitcher & Manda v. Lowe
95 Ga. 423 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1895)
Byrd v. Campbell Printing-Press & Manufacturing Co.
20 S.E. 253 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1894)
Georgia Refining Co. v. Augusta Oil Co.
74 Ga. 497 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1885)
Goins v. Western Railroad
59 Ga. 426 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
29 Ga. 294, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-leeper-menafee-ga-1859.