Freeman v. McDaniel

23 Ga. 354
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided August 15, 1857·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

By the Court.

Lumpkin, J.

delivering the opinion.

To entitle the plaintiff to recover, he must show both fraud and damage, admitting the fraud, he has failed to show that he has been injured, because he has failed to show what the mule cost him, in other words, what the horse ivas worth, that he traded for the mule, consequently we hold, that the Court was wrong in sustaining the certiorari. Indeed, there was a conflict of proof in the case, and it is not easy to determine upon which side the weight of evidence preponderated. The amount involved is twenty-five dollars, the complainant alleged deceit in swapping a moon-eyed mule. Can there be any better tribunal for the decision of [356] such controversies, than a Justice Court and a jury of the vicinage? especially where, as in this case, the question is one of fact and not of law.

Judgment reversed.

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

Freeman v. McDaniel, 23 Ga. 354 (Ga. 1857).

23 Ga. 354 (Freeman v. McDaniel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reynolds v. Flint River Technical Institute
477 S.E.2d 393 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1996)
Stovall Tire & Marine, Inc. v. Prance Body & Fender Works
347 S.E.2d 313 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1986)
Foster v. Sikes
42 S.E.2d 441 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1947)
Summer v. Hogsed
152 S.E. 260 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1930)
Clark v. Morgan County Nat. Bank
196 F. 709 (D. Colorado, 1912)
Jones v. Foster
51 N.E. 862 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1898)
Alden v. Wright
49 N.W. 767 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1891)
Carvill v. Jacks
43 Ark. 454 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1884)
Hale v. Philbrick
47 Iowa 217 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1878)